# Bonkers (The training tool): Is my dog defective or something???



## voodoolamb

I attempted to use the "Bonker" technique on my dog tonight. As described by Gary Wilkes and promoted by others... 

My dog was being a jerk and nosing the AC vent. He ignored my "leave it" command so out came the trusty bonker. I tossed it at him. It bounced off his head and he turned and looked at me like huh? Then went back to making out with the AC vent for a few moments, afterwards he picked up the bonker and brought it to me trying to play.

Is that how it is supposed to work?


----------



## Jenny720

Yes that's exactly how it works. Lol!


----------



## llombardo

I believe so, it's what my dogs would do. 

I really needed to smile. Thank you!


----------



## Coleen

Lmao!

Yes, your dog is defective, the ac vent won't give him puppies.


----------



## Bramble

Lol! I think that is about what my guy would do if I tossed a rolled up towel at him. "Oh you want to play!" I threw a pillow at him once when he was bugging his sister and he was unfazed. Just like oh cool, and then I had to take it away because he thought it was a toy...


----------



## Steve Strom

A long time ago I'd probably make a comment along the lines of "You throw like a girl" I'm a lot more enlightened now, so I'll just point out the contradiction of toss vs bonk. If you're tossin, it ain't bonkin.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom

Definitely made me smile.


----------



## Sunsilver

What's a bonker, Precious??


----------



## Slamdunc

Steve Strom said:


> A long time ago I'd probably make a comment along the lines of "You throw like a girl" I'm a lot more enlightened now, so I'll just point out the contradiction of toss vs bonk. If you're tossin, it ain't bonkin.


I suppose some one like Nolan Ryan could toss a rolled up towel hard enough to make it work. 

It's a technique that might work with soft, skittish, nervous dogs. A GSD with a good temperament would just use it as a toy and think it was a game. 

Not a technique that I would use or rely on. We train narcotics detection dogs by throwing a rolled up towel to them, hitting directly above their head as a reward. We hit the source of the odor pretty hard and throw the towel really fast to reward. The idea is to simulate the towel exploding from the aid as the dog locks up and puts it's nose to source. Occasionally, a dog gets "bonked" and they find it to be a fun part of the game. That is the only time I would throw a rolled up towel at a dog. As a reward, not a punishment or to startle.


----------



## Steve Strom

Or Jenny Finch, Jim. Its 2017.


----------



## Slamdunc

Steve Strom said:


> Or Jenny Finch, Jim. Its 2017.


Give me a minute to google "Jenny Finch."


----------



## Slamdunc

https://youtu.be/gm9iZnqGMvY

Yes, she could probably throw a towel pretty hard.


----------



## Steve Strom

Softball chick.


----------



## Sunsilver

This goes back to William Koehler's much maligned book on training guard dogs, only he used a choke chain, because the noise would startle the dog. And I suppose if you tossed a choke chain hard enough, you COULD make it hurt, but that wasn't the idea. It was supposed to be a distraction, not a punishment.


----------



## Steve Strom

Wait, can you say chick? Which is the bad one, chickie?


----------



## Muskeg

Bonkers... there is no magic there. Also, I don't want my dogs skittish of thrown objects, for reasons Jim described when giving rewards. 

There is more effective training and the video demos of the bonker being used make me a bit sick. Poor timing, dog doesn't "get" it, and the trainer himself comes across as both arrogant to the people in the seminar and untrustworthy to the dog. 

I'd like to see him try to "bonk" a certain one of my dogs to stop a behavior... that would be fun. 

There are better ways to train a dog than with a bonker, and personally I don't like much of what I've seen of Gary Wilkes' training.


----------



## cloudpump

voodoolamb said:


> I attempted to use the "Bonker" technique on my dog tonight. As described by Gary Wilkes and promoted by others...
> 
> My dog was being a jerk and nosing the AC vent. He ignored my "leave it" command so out came the trusty bonker. I tossed it at him. It bounced off his head and he turned and looked at me like huh? Then went back to making out with the AC vent for a few moments, afterwards he picked up the bonker and brought it to me trying to play.
> 
> Is that how it is supposed to work?


Pm sent


----------



## Sunsilver

You know those shake cans that some people think are a great tool for disciplining your dog? :rolleyes2:

Well, I had one of those for temperament testing Star as a pup, when I went to pick her up from the breeder. She wanted to play with it... :laugh2:

I knew right then I was picking the right pup!

What really sealed the deal was afterwards when she climbed into my lap, and curled up... uppy:


----------



## wombat

I'm so glad I found this thread. I came here looking for answers after someone posted a Gary Wilkes video on a GSD Facebook page I'm part of.

The chat errupted in curses about how much of an idiot the guy is and how wrong his stuff is, and when I asked what to look for (because the dog didn't really seem too bothered) I got told to stop hijacking someone else's thread. I'm not an advocate of positive punishment, just a new dog owner looking to educate myself beyond a knee-jerk emotional response of "it makes me sad when I hurt my dog" - that reason makes little sense to me as I was raised with corporal punishment.

I decided to leave the group - I didn't like the tendency toward emotional decision making without critical discussion.

Rant over.

I'm glad I came here where it seems cooler heads are pointing out the flaws without resorting to name calling - I myself have found that whenever I (in moments I am not proud of) have had to get physical with Chuck (for instance when he's hanging off my leg) he just thinks I'm joining in with the game.

Am I correct in thinking that this is one of the major flaws of positive punishment in the hands of an amateur?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## cdwoodcox

LMAO!! When I hear positive punishment my mind goes to fifty shades of Grey. Not dog training. 
Per the bonker technique. All of my dogs would think it was a game. Which they would associate with the unwanted behavior. Oh I stick my face in the vent I get a cool new chew toy.


----------



## Muskeg

Reminds me of a "behaviorist" who used a spray bottle to correct a working-line malinois. The spray bottle was quickly dispatched by the dog, and the behaviorist deemed him untrainable and "feral" type. Behaviorist was so wrong about the dog, who is one of the most stable-social dogs I've met and indeed very trainable once you understand this type of dog. Spray bottles are for cats, in my opinion (nothing against cats, but they work nicely for cats that eat stuff they shouldn't, etc.) 

Punishment can be anything the dog doesn't like. By nature of what it is, it is something that makes the dog less likely to do something. With an amateur trainer, it's more about understanding how to communicate properly what you like and what you don't want, to the dog, rather than anything else. Some of that is timing, but not all.


----------



## Heartandsoul

Ok, I admit it. I bonked my boy over the head with a bag that had a sweater in it. we were walking to the church parking lot that has a Good Will box for clothing donations. On the way, he sees a dog and starts to stiffen. I really was tired of the same o same o collar correction so... bonk right on top of the head. No startle, no fear, he just looked up at me like really?????. I looked at him like yup and if you don't mind you're Ps and Qs I'll do it again.>


----------



## dogfaeries

I've thrown a small throw pillow at Scarlet before, to interrupt her shenanigans. She thought it was a fun new game I'd invented. If I had gone over and whacked her on the head with it, she would've loved it even more. No, I don't think the bonker was made for her. She's not a very delicate girl, lol.


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> We train narcotics detection dogs by throwing a rolled up towel to them, hitting directly above their head as a reward. We hit the source of the odor pretty hard and throw the towel really fast to reward. The idea is to simulate the towel exploding from the aid as the dog locks up and puts it's nose to source. Occasionally, a dog gets "bonked" and they find it to be a fun part of the game. That is the only time I would throw a rolled up towel at a dog. As a reward, not a punishment or to startle.


Sigh ... OK then you actually state that you use a "Bonker" for "training" ... which as near as I can tell ... would actually, "condition" a dog to that "tool?" And then extrapolate, that to ... it won't work effectively for ... JQP's untrained, out of control door bolting (among other issues) dog's that people that "can't" train a dog experience???

I don't see how a "Bonker" is that much different then the "concept" behind a "Throw Chain???" But I guess me, William Kohler, Gary Wilkes and Jeff Gellman to name a few ... just lack imagine??? I suppose ... I'll just have to get one of them numerous "Soft Squishy Dog's" not train them and find out for myself??? As I am want to say ... "Show me."


----------



## Heartandsoul

Chip18 said:


> Sigh ... OK then you actually state that you use a "Bonker" for "training" ... which as near as I can tell ... would actually, "condition" a dog to that "tool?" And then extrapolate, that to ... it won't work effectively for ... JQP's untrained, out of control door bolting (among other issues) dog's that people that "can't" train a dog experience???
> 
> I don't see how a "Bonker" is that much different then the "concept" behind a "Throw Chain???" But I guess me, William Kohler, Gary Wilkes and Jeff Gellman to name a few ... just lack imagine??? I suppose ... I'll just have to get one of them numerous "Soft Squishy Dog's" not train them and find out for myself??? As I am want to say ... "Show me."


I've watched a couple vids using the technique and one vid, was so wrong for the dog imho. It was for da and the da dog after getting bonked was scared/tail between legs. I'm nowhere near experienced (maybe a tad better than jqp) but I would not be happy if I had a soft dog and a "good trainer" was using a technique that was making him more scared.

Seems counter intuitive for a soft fear aggressive dog. I'm pretty sure there are more effective ways. Not sure which one of the three did that video but I would have loved to see a follow up after showing the same dog not tucking tail when that trainer approached. I could be all wet but that is the memory and impression I got from that particular vid.

The problem I encountered as a jqp is that it took me a looong time to get anywhere near the timing and precision of my chosen methods, and it is the time that I t takes to learn exactly how and when to use it. any technique can foul up a dog. I'm just really glad I never came across the Bonker vids when I was brand spanking new as I question how my boy may have ended up. With his temperament, maybe handler aggressive or yay play time. Who knows.


----------



## Slamdunc

Chip18 said:


> Sigh ... OK then you actually state that you use a "Bonker" for "training" ... which as near as I can tell ... would actually, "condition" a dog to that "tool?" And then extrapolate, that to ... it won't work effectively for ... JQP's untrained, out of control door bolting (among other issues) dog's that people that "can't" train a dog experience???
> 
> I don't see how a "Bonker" is that much different then the "concept" behind a "Throw Chain???" But I guess me, William Kohler, Gary Wilkes and Jeff Gellman to name a few ... just lack imagine??? I suppose ... I'll just have to get one of them numerous "Soft Squishy Dog's" not train them and find out for myself??? As I am want to say ... "Show me."


No, I do not use a "bonker" for training in the method described to punish a dog. I use a taped rolled up towel as a reward. It is thrown at the source of the odor to reward the dog, not to startle, scare, punish or correct a dog. If it works for you and you use it, that is fine. It simply will not work with every dog. It simply will be seen as a toy by stronger dogs and not phase them in the least. I do use a bottle filled with beer caps or rocks in our training. I use it with puppies to desensitize them to noise and stimulus. I use a laundry detergent bottle with beer caps to fend off dogs when decoying, the dogs all fight right through it. 

William Kohler had some good stuff, but we have put a man on the moon while he was training dogs. I've read Kohler's books, used some of his techniques and still use some of his techniques. You must realize that dog training has evolved, especially in the last 25 years. We have made great strides in dog training since the time when Kohler was active. We have gone from the stone ages to the space age. While Kohler was a bit of a pioneer and I respect what he has done and accomplished, I recognize that things have changed. 

I've watched Gary Wilkes video of the bonker and think his use of that with the dogs he trains is pretty bad. I've seen some of Gellman's videos and what he describes as aggressive dogs, well they look like nice pet dogs that are a little rambunctious to me. I handle aggressive dogs, I train aggressive dogs, and I evaluate dogs for their aggression. I've haven't seen one on any of Gellman's videos that I think are hard to handle dogs, nor would I be reluctant to take out of a kennel and train. A good example is the golden retriever that is supposedly aggressive around kids, I watched his video and did not see an aggressive dog, or a dog that would seriously harm a child. I saw a nice, young dog that needed a little obedience and manners. Not the child eating cujo that Gellman described. 

Bottom line is that I do not like Wilke's technique of using a bonker. If it is a technique that works for you, then that is great. I've been to seminars where a bird dog guy wanted to use it on our dogs. I had to caution him that he would be seriously bitten with that technique. I don't own or work with pointers or labs. and what works with softer less aggressive dogs will not work with Dutch Shepherds, Malionois, X's or even a harder GSD. That is the problem with giving or getting advice on the internet. With out seeing a dog it is hard to recommend a technique that will work every time. Or a technique that won't damage the dog or get a handler bit. 

I've worked with a lot of dogs over the years, and one thing that I have learned is that there is not one universal technique in dog training that will work with every dog. I've worked and owned hard dogs, handler aggressive dogs, soft dogs and everything in between. One thing that I am certain of is that each dog needs to be handled and trained individually. 

I prefer a method of teaching, training then proofing. I teach and train motivationally, once a dog understands a command or concept there are consequences for disobedience. Would I throw something at an "uncontrollable dog for bolting out of a door" as you describe? No, I would close the door and teach the dog to control itself. I teach impulse control and "capping" first. I teach a dog to sit by an open door and wait before going out. There is a foundation to be taught and fundamentals to train before going to compulsion, IMO. If I have to start with "bonking" then I feel I have short cutted my training and done the dog a huge disservice. 

I'll take patience and a pragmatic approach to start, then more patience and teaching and training. I'l control the dog so it learns to be correct and praise and reward when correct. IME, this is a far better solution in the long run then "bonking."


----------



## cliffson1

Slamdunc said:


> No, I do not use a "bonker" for training in the method described to punish a dog. I use a taped rolled up towel as a reward. It is thrown at the source of the odor to reward the dog, not to startle, scare, punish or correct a dog. If it works for you and you use it, that is fine. It simply will not work with every dog. It simply will be seen as a toy by stronger dogs and not phase them in the least. I do use a bottle filled with beer caps or rocks in our training. I use it with puppies to desensitize them to noise and stimulus. I use a laundry detergent bottle with beer caps to fend off dogs when decoying, the dogs all fight right through it.
> 
> William Kohler had some good stuff, but we have put a man on the moon while he was training dogs. I've read Kohler's books, used some of his techniques and still use some of his techniques. You must realize that dog training has evolved, especially in the last 25 years. We have made great strides in dog training since the time when Kohler was active. We have gone from the stone ages to the space age. While Kohler was a bit of a pioneer and I respect what he has done and accomplished, I recognize that things have changed.
> 
> I've watched Gary Wilkes video of the bonker and think his use of that with the dogs he trains is pretty bad. I've seen some of Gellman's videos and what he describes as aggressive dogs, well they look like nice pet dogs that are a little rambunctious to me. I handle aggressive dogs, I train aggressive dogs, and I evaluate dogs for their aggression. I've haven't seen one on any of Gellman's videos that I think are hard to handle dogs, nor would I be reluctant to take out of a kennel and train. A good example is the golden retriever that is supposedly aggressive around kids, I watched his video and did not see an aggressive dog, or a dog that would seriously harm a child. I saw a nice, young dog that needed a little obedience and manners. Not the child eating cujo that Gellman described.
> 
> Bottom line is that I do not like Wilke's technique of using a bonker. If it is a technique that works for you, then that is great. I've been to seminars where a bird dog guy wanted to use it on our dogs. I had to caution him that he would be seriously bitten with that technique. I don't own or work with pointers or labs. and what works with softer less aggressive dogs will not work with Dutch Shepherds, Malionois, X's or even a harder GSD. That is the problem with giving or getting advice on the internet. With out seeing a dog it is hard to recommend a technique that will work every time. Or a technique that won't damage the dog or get a handler bit.
> 
> I've worked with a lot of dogs over the years, and one thing that I have learned is that there is not one universal technique in dog training that will work with every dog. I've worked and owned hard dogs, handler aggressive dogs, soft dogs and everything in between. One thing that I am certain of is that each dog needs to be handled and trained individually.
> 
> I prefer a method of teaching, training then proofing. I teach and train motivationally, once a dog understands a command or concept there are consequences for disobedience. Would I throw something at an "uncontrollable dog for bolting out of a door" as you describe? No, I would close the door and teach the dog to control itself. I teach impulse control and "capping" first. I teach a dog to sit by an open door and wait before going out. There is a foundation to be taught and fundamentals to train before going to compulsion, IMO. If I have to start with "bonking" then I feel I have short cutted my training and done the dog a huge disservice.
> 
> I'll take patience and a pragmatic approach to start, then more patience and teaching and training. I'l control the dog so it learns to be correct and praise and reward when correct. IME, this is a far better solution in the long run then "bonking."


Thank you, Lawd!


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> No, I do not use a "bonker" for training in the method described to punish a dog. I use a taped rolled up towel as a reward. It is thrown at the source of the odor to reward the dog, not to startle, scare, punish or correct a dog. If it works for you and you use it, that is fine. It simply will not work with every dog. It simply will be seen as a toy by stronger dogs and not phase them in the least. I do use a bottle filled with beer caps or rocks in our training. I use it with puppies to desensitize them to noise and stimulus. I use a laundry detergent bottle with beer caps to fend off dogs when decoying, the dogs all fight right through it.
> 
> William Kohler had some good stuff, but we have put a man on the moon while he was training dogs. I've read Kohler's books, used some of his techniques and still use some of his techniques. You must realize that dog training has evolved, especially in the last 25 years. We have made great strides in dog training since the time when Kohler was active. We have gone from the stone ages to the space age. While Kohler was a bit of a pioneer and I respect what he has done and accomplished, I recognize that things have changed.
> 
> I've watched Gary Wilkes video of the bonker and think his use of that with the dogs he trains is pretty bad. I've seen some of Gellman's videos and what he describes as aggressive dogs, well they look like nice pet dogs that are a little rambunctious to me. I handle aggressive dogs, I train aggressive dogs, and I evaluate dogs for their aggression. I've haven't seen one on any of Gellman's videos that I think are hard to handle dogs, nor would I be reluctant to take out of a kennel and train. A good example is the golden retriever that is supposedly aggressive around kids, I watched his video and did not see an aggressive dog, or a dog that would seriously harm a child. I saw a nice, young dog that needed a little obedience and manners. Not the child eating cujo that Gellman described.
> 
> Bottom line is that I do not like Wilke's technique of using a bonker. If it is a technique that works for you, then that is great. I've been to seminars where a bird dog guy wanted to use it on our dogs. I had to caution him that he would be seriously bitten with that technique. I don't own or work with pointers or labs. and what works with softer less aggressive dogs will not work with Dutch Shepherds, Malionois, X's or even a harder GSD. That is the problem with giving or getting advice on the internet. With out seeing a dog it is hard to recommend a technique that will work every time. Or a technique that won't damage the dog or get a handler bit.
> 
> I've worked with a lot of dogs over the years, and one thing that I have learned is that there is not one universal technique in dog training that will work with every dog. I've worked and owned hard dogs, handler aggressive dogs, soft dogs and everything in between. One thing that I am certain of is that each dog needs to be handled and trained individually.
> 
> I prefer a method of teaching, training then proofing. I teach and train motivationally, once a dog understands a command or concept there are consequences for disobedience. Would I throw something at an "uncontrollable dog for bolting out of a door" as you describe? No, I would close the door and teach the dog to control itself. I teach impulse control and "capping" first. I teach a dog to sit by an open door and wait before going out. There is a foundation to be taught and fundamentals to train before going to compulsion, IMO. If I have to start with "bonking" then I feel I have short cutted my training and done the dog a huge disservice.
> 
> I'll take patience and a pragmatic approach to start, then more patience and teaching and training. I'l control the dog so it learns to be correct and praise and reward when correct. IME, this is a far better solution in the long run then "bonking."


Aw well as the saying goes ... "don't shoot the messenger." I get how "you use the "Bonker" but that is not how "Gary Wilkes" uses it. So your use of it is a "variation." If it works for you as the saying goes ... no problem. 

And my advocation for the use of the "Bonker" is not about me. I have not found the need to use one myself??? But I ... know how "to train a dog." But the ... "thousands of people that attend "Gary Wilkes" seminars ... do not! Those are the people whose dogs, are one door bolting adventure away most likely away from getting killed??? They don't know how to do the leash training thing ... to stop that behaviour??? They need a solution ... right freaking now or they won't have a dog to "train!" 

And Cat dog Dog people ... who are cat people first??? They have a pretty low threshold for Cat Dog crap. If this "rescue" even looks at my cat's hard? He/She is freaking out of here! If the proper application of a "Bonker" will stop that behaviour ... right freaking now! That dog can stay in that home. That ... is what I care about ... not debating with people that already know how to train a dog on what works best???

People that already know how to train a dog ... don't attend Gary Wilkes, seminars??? People that do attend are those whose dogs are one episode away from, back to rescue you go dog! They are the ones ... "I care about." If folks already know how to train a dog ... I don't care. People that can't do that are my thing. If they can stop whatever the issue is, right freaking now with a "Bonker??" Then "maybe" that dog can stay in that home??? It's not about me ... so you know ... be clear on that point. The Bonker thing, is not about me, just saying. 

As for Jeff Gellman and dog and kids ... OK no problem. Point me to another trainer that "Shows their work" with "Dogs and kids, I'd be more than happy to share their work also ??? As the saying goes ... talk is cheap ... "show your work" just saying. 

And as for "William Kohler" yep ... many many years ago ... and yet ... maybe it's just a lack of imagine on my part??? But I don't see how Tyler Muto's " Conversational Leash Work":







is nothing but a variation on William Kohler's work with a long line,??? You lose the hard directional changes and the I don't care where the dog is bit ... and it strikes me as pretty much the same thing???


----------



## Slamdunc

Chip,
To be very clear, I DO NOT use the "bonker!" I do not train dogs that way. I do not advocate the "bonker" and I do not like how Gary Wilkes uses it. I am not a fan of Gary Wilkes training and I have expressed many times, very clearly the training methods that I use. 

I'm not "shooting the messenger" by any means. You are advocating a training technique that you have endorsed and included links to videos of Wilkes training in the past. Now, you say that you have not found the need to use a "bonker", because you can train dogs? You then say the "bonker" thing is not about you, but the only place that I have seen it mentioned has been on this forum by you. I'm on a lot of dog forums and work with a lot of dog people, the only posts that I have seen it referred to are posts by you. Yes, you are the messenger and before recommending a training technique, I think you should have first hand experience with the training method to propose it. 

If there are thousands of novices that are attending Gary Wilkes seminars as you say, that do not know how to train dogs, well that is unfortunate and very concerning. People need to have a clear understanding of the effects of compulsion on dogs. _The people that adopt rescue dogs that certainly have baggage and issues need a better method to rehabilitate and train their dog than throwing things at the poor dog. A bonker is clearly not the answer, IMHO._ 

Geez, talk about compounding issues and eroding trust.


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> Chip,
> To be very clear, I DO NOT use the "bonker!" I do not train dogs that way. I do not advocate the "bonker" and I do not like how Gary Wilkes uses it. I am not a fan of Gary Wilkes training and I have expressed many times, very clearly the training methods that I use.
> 
> I'm not "shooting the messenger" by any means. You are advocating a training technique that you have endorsed and included links to videos of Wilkes training in the past. Now, you say that you have not found the need to use a "bonker", because you can train dogs? You then say the "bonker" thing is not about you, but the only place that I have seen it mentioned has been on this forum by you. I'm on a lot of dog forums and work with a lot of dog people, the only posts that I have seen it referred to are posts by you. Yes, you are the messenger and before recommending a training technique, I think you should have first hand experience with the training method to propose it.
> 
> If there are thousands of novices that are attending Gary Wilkes seminars as you say, that do not know how to train dogs, well that is unfortunate and very concerning. People need to have a clear understanding of the effects of compulsion on dogs. _The people that adopt rescue dogs that certainly have baggage and issues need a better method to rehabilitate and train their dog than throwing things at the poor dog. A bonker is clearly not the answer, IMHO._
> 
> Geez, talk about compounding issues and eroding trust.


Ah well ... as a wise philosopher once said ... "Don't have a cow man." :

You said ..."No, I do not use a "bonker" for training in the method described to punish a dog. I use a taped rolled up towel as a reward. It is thrown at the source of the odor to reward the dog, not to startle, scare, punish or correct a dog." 


While that it is not it's intended use ... you explained it well and there is no confusion with how you use a "Bonker." Pretty creative I'd say and no there is no "confusion" with how you use ... uh that tool. You could have easily called it something else and most likely ... I'm the only that would have said ... "hey wait a minute???" Most likely ... if I did what you do??? I would ask you about how you use the "Bonker thing???" I really don't see how how that would be a bad thing???

Moving on well ... nope I don't use a "Bonker" because I know how to train a dog. But the "Bonker" as I've said ... it is not about me! But ... I get it and if as you say all site reference me??? Then no problem, if people care that much ... then they will also see this .... 

https://www.facebook.com/gary.wilkes.39?ref=br_rs

And they will see my note ... to ask him and be "respectful" because he does not bare fools well!! You have been warned! But you know by and large people don't go there or here for "Bonker" questions ... they simply come to me. Believe it or not ...not everyone is satisfied with "Find a trainer" as the best advice??? So when I am not doing stuff like well uh "this" that's what I do answer question in "PM's." I remember what it is like to "struggle" with a dog and I got it done on my own without ... "Finding a Training" thank you very much and yep ... I got them stitches! So you know ... don't do what I did to make that happen! But bottom line ... I got it done and my "Soft, Squishy Dog" is still here. 

So ... I don't need to use a "Bonker" but I don't have Counter Surfing, Cat Chasing, Door Bolting, yard escaping dogs to contend with. For those that do ... the proper application of a "Bonker" will stop that crap ... right freaking now! I have seen Gary Wilkes use a "Bonker" as a freaking club??? That surprised even me! But you know ... the dog was fine! The dog understood clearly ... that his behaviour caused "that" particular "consequence!" So for the dog... if I don't do that ... nothing bad happens ??? 

I really don't care about hand picked, perfect temperament, prima donna puppies that also happen to like people. Distract and treat away ... if those dogs//puppies are not a bite risk ...it makes no difference been there done that. But if one does not happen to get a dog like that ... then they best get it right out the gate or Law Suites and PTS it is! "Zero Bite" risk policy is how I roll ... no apologies. I remember where I came from and while I went to ER ... my dog my problem ... no stranger involvement ... good enough, I roll hard as it were no problem. 

But back on pointe ... if people and thousands if not millions of them have an unsolvable issue ... for them, have a behaviour with there dogs that they cannot solve?? Then yep ... "Bonk" away if they can stop "whatever " that particular issue is "right freaking now." Then they are more likely to keep their dog and then proceed from there to actually training their dog, if they can stop whatever it is right freaking now. Then they can see light at the end of the tunnel as it were and actually "Training their dogs will seem like a good idea??? It seems fairly simple to me??? 

But whatever, I don't really see the point in going to a dog forum and having people tell one to "Find a Trainer" myself??? Most likely that is a lack of imagination on my part but ... what are you gonna do??? Nuff said.


----------



## cliffson1

I have been to dozens and dozens of seminars by some of the foremost trainers in world, most of people I see going to seminars are people who are either trainers or dog handlers, usually trying to expand their knowledge base. I have found that people that have dogs with life threatening behaviors that know nothing about dog training, reach out to experienced people,( trainers, behaviorist, vets,etc) to get fixes as opposed to waiting to schedule their time to attend a seminar which probably is available in their area every couple years.
Or at the very least they enroll in local obedience school.


----------



## Tennessee

Chip18 said:


> Ah well ... as a wise philosopher once said ... "Don't have a cow man." :
> 
> You said ..."No, I do not use a "bonker" for training in the method described to punish a dog. I use a taped rolled up towel as a reward. It is thrown at the source of the odor to reward the dog, not to startle, scare, punish or correct a dog."
> 
> 
> While that it is not it's intended use ... you explained it well and there is no confusion with how you use a "Bonker." Pretty creative I'd say and no there is no "confusion" with how you use ... uh that tool. You could have easily called it something else and most likely ... I'm the only that would have said ... "hey wait a minute???" Most likely ... if I did what you do??? I would ask you about how you use the "Bonker thing???" I really don't see how how that would be a bad thing???
> 
> Moving on well ... nope I don't use a "Bonker" because I know how to train a dog. But the "Bonker" as I've said ... it is not about me! But ... I get it and if as you say all site reference me??? Then no problem, if people care that much ... then they will also see this ....
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/gary.wilkes.39?ref=br_rs
> 
> And they will see my note ... to ask him and be "respectful" because he does not bare fools well!! You have been warned! But you know by and large people don't go there or here for "Bonker" questions ... they simply come to me. Believe it or not ...not everyone is satisfied with "Find a trainer" as the best advice??? So when I am not doing stuff like well uh "this" that's what I do answer question in "PM's." I remember what it is like to "struggle" with a dog and I got it done on my own without ... "Finding a Training" thank you very much and yep ... I got them stitches! So you know ... don't do what I did to make that happen! But bottom line ... I got it done and my "Soft, Squishy Dog" is still here.
> 
> So ... I don't need to use a "Bonker" but I don't have Counter Surfing, Cat Chasing, Door Bolting, yard escaping dogs to contend with. For those that do ... the proper application of a "Bonker" will stop that crap ... right freaking now! I have seen Gary Wilkes use a "Bonker" as a freaking club??? That surprised even me! But you know ... the dog was fine! The dog understood clearly ... that his behaviour caused "that" particular "consequence!" So for the dog... if I don't do that ... nothing bad happens ???
> 
> I really don't care about hand picked, perfect temperament, prima donna puppies that also happen to like people. Distract and treat away ... if those dogs//puppies are not a bite risk ...it makes no difference been there done that. But if one does not happen to get a dog like that ... then they best get it right out the gate or Law Suites and PTS it is! "Zero Bite" risk policy is how I roll ... no apologies. I remember where I came from and while I went to ER ... my dog my problem ... no stranger involvement ... good enough, I roll hard as it were no problem.
> 
> But back on pointe ... if people and thousands if not millions of them have an unsolvable issue ... for them, have a behaviour with there dogs that they cannot solve?? Then yep ... "Bonk" away if they can stop "whatever " that particular issue is "right freaking now." Then they are more likely to keep their dog and then proceed from there to actually training their dog, if they can stop whatever it is right freaking now. Then they can see light at the end of the tunnel as it were and actually "Training their dogs will seem like a good idea??? It seems fairly simple to me???
> 
> But whatever, I don't really see the point in going to a dog forum and having people tell one to "Find a Trainer" myself??? Most likely that is a lack of imagination on my part but ... what are you gonna do??? Nuff said.


Serious question is your writing style intentional?

But about bonkers, are you seriously advocating as a legitimate training method on which to base a career roughly "if you've lost control of your dog, throw stuff at its head"?


----------



## Slamdunc

Chip,
It is nice and admirable that you offer to help people on the internet with their dogs. I also help people online as well as in person with their dogs. However, my experience comes from working and training a variety of dogs in the real world in several disciplines. However, we must be sure the advice and methodologies that we recommend are sound. We also must ensure that the advice we give will work for the dog and handler, safely and effectively. 

There are many training techniques that will work for some handlers and dogs. Those same techniques may cause a different dog to become aggressive and redirect to their handler. One technique that may work with a certain type of dog may shut another dog down and be detrimental. If someone has a rescue dog or a shelter dog, then the dog needs to be handled and trained differently. The dog may have been abused, have separation anxiety, temperament issues, etc. To throw things at a dog like that is not helping the situation for many dogs and owners. I'm not into quick fixes, and just hammering a dog to behave and conform. Few issues need to be "fixed right now." and that approach leaves a lot to be desired. 

People that understand training and have experience will often recommend seeking out professional help. I will often recommend seeking out a knowledgeable trainer. Not because I can not offer advice or suggestions, but like others I know that seeing a dog in person is the best way to go. Sometimes owners can not accurately describe or diagnose what they are seeing in their dog's behavior. Sometimes what they think they see is not at all what is happening. If you base your advice on what your are told, you could be really off base. Giving advice without seeing a dog is a slippery slope, what works for one dog and handler may be very detrimental for another dog and handler. That is why the experienced members often reply that a trainer is needed.


----------



## Sunsilver

"if people and thousands if not millions of them have an unsolvable issue ... for them, have a behaviour with there dogs that they cannot solve?? Then yep ... "Bonk" away if they can stop "whatever " that particular issue is "right freaking now." Then they are more likely to keep their dog and then proceed from there to actually training their dog, if they can stop whatever it is right freaking now. Then they can see light at the end of the tunnel as it were and actually "Training their dogs will seem like a good idea??? It seems fairly simple to me???" 

I THINK what he's trying to say is, if you don't know how to train your dog, and you've lost control temporarily, (and your dog is about to dash out the door, for example, and maybe get run over) throwing something at it in an attempt to distract it and interrupt the behaviour MAY save its life.

Then, once they've saved its life, maybe "training their dogs will seem like a good idea??"

(And yes, that's Chip's usual writing style.)

But of course, you have to wonder why the idea of training the dog first doesn't occur to them. 

Arrrgh. I think the bonker is a horrible idea as a training tool, BUT if my dog was focusing on something that was about to get it into trouble, and I wasn't able to do a leash correction, I'd do WHATEVER I could to get its attention and distract it. And that MIGHT mean throwing something at it to break its focus.

I once hit my dog over the head with a paddle, because I'd foolishly let the leash get out of my reach, and she was about to jump out of the canoe, and dump us both into very, very cold water. That might have had serious, if not fatal, consequences for both of us. She was totally ignoring verbal corrections, and I had to act fast. The paddle was the only tool available, and she was SO fixated on jumping that I had to hit her more than once.

Needless to say, I didn't let that happen again!


----------



## Tennessee

Slamdunc said:


> Chip,
> It is nice and admirable that you offer to help people on the internet with their dogs. I also help people online as well as in person with their dogs. However, my experience comes from working and training a variety of dogs in the real world in several disciplines. However, we must be sure the advice and methodologies that we recommend are sound. We also must ensure that the advice we give will work for the dog and handler, safely and effectively.
> 
> There are many training techniques that will work for some handlers and dogs. Those same techniques may cause a different dog to become aggressive and redirect to their handler. One technique that may work with a certain type of dog may shut another dog down and be detrimental. If someone has a rescue dog or a shelter dog, then the dog needs to be handled and trained differently. The dog may have been abused, have separation anxiety, temperament issues, etc. To throw things at a dog like that is not helping the situation for many dogs and owners. I'm not into quick fixes, and just hammering a dog to behave and conform. Few issues need to be "fixed right now." and that approach leaves a lot to be desired.
> 
> People that understand training and have experience will often recommend seeking out professional help. I will often recommend seeking out a knowledgeable trainer. Not because I can not offer advice or suggestions, but like others I know that seeing a dog in person is the best way to go. Sometimes owners can not accurately describe or diagnose what they are seeing in their dog's behavior. Sometimes what they think they see is not at all what is happening. If you base your advice on what your are told, you could be really off base. Giving advice without seeing a dog is a slippery slope, what works for one dog and handler may be very detrimental for another dog and handler. That is why the experienced members often reply that a trainer is needed.


Slamdunc I always enjoy your posts and appreciate the time you take to share your extensive real world experience. 

I say that to piggyback on your point below:

I've learned a lot from you and others posts on here. And from simple reading and watching videos, I've learned enough to train my puppy to a level that the average person finds exceptional and as a matter of fact even earned me some rarely given impressed kudos from my trainer for the hard consistent work I've put in. 

But I still paid good money for a trainer for two reasons
1) a trainer is there really to train YOU not the dog. They watch the dog and you develop a plan and teach you how to train your dog. Practice makes perfect, Steph Curry didn't get that perfect jumper from shoot around at highschool bball practice. 

2) Animals speak mostly through body language, that includes humans by the way! You're not watching yourself when you're training, if you don't have the experience there's a million different things you could be doing that's holding your dog back. You CANNOT learn that from a book, video, or the internet.


----------



## Muskeg

The bonker is a veiled method of physical correction - that is hitting- the dog. I am not against physical corrections, in the right context, and when fair and clear to the dog, but lets come right out and say it, not give it the cute bonking name. Maybe then we can really get into how to train a dog, and communicate what we want and don't want, rather than hide behind a rolled towel. It's lots more complicated than that.


----------



## Tennessee

Sunsilver said:


> "if people and thousands if not millions of them have an unsolvable issue ... for them, have a behaviour with there dogs that they cannot solve?? Then yep ... "Bonk" away if they can stop "whatever " that particular issue is "right freaking now." Then they are more likely to keep their dog and then proceed from there to actually training their dog, if they can stop whatever it is right freaking now. Then they can see light at the end of the tunnel as it were and actually "Training their dogs will seem like a good idea??? It seems fairly simple to me???"
> 
> I THINK what he's trying to say is, if you don't know how to train your dog, and you've lost control temporarily, (and your dog is about to dash out the door, for example, and maybe get run over) throwing something at it in an attempt to distract it and interrupt the behaviour MAY save its life.
> 
> Then, once they've saved its life, maybe "training their dogs will seem like a good idea??"
> 
> (And yes, that's Chip's usual writing style.)
> 
> But of course, you have to wonder why the idea of training the dog first doesn't occur to them.
> 
> Arrrgh. I think the bonker is a horrible idea as a training tool, BUT if my dog was focusing on something that was about to get it into trouble, and I wasn't able to do a leash correction, I'd do WHATEVER I could to get its attention and distract it. And that MIGHT mean throwing something at it to break its focus.
> 
> I once hit my dog over the head with a paddle, because I'd foolishly let the leash get out of my reach, and she was about to jump out of the canoe, and dump us both into very, very cold water. That might have had serious, if not fatal, consequences for both of us. She was totally ignoring verbal corrections, and I had to act fast. The paddle was the only tool available, and she was SO fixated on jumping that I had to hit her more than once.
> 
> Needless to say, I didn't let that happen again!


Yeah I 100% understand what you're getting at, as the old proverb puts it "needs must when the devil drives".

I've done things like check my puppy with my foot to the chest with a hard enough combined impact to knock her on her booty when I had food in my mouth and she went to chase the cat. I've smacked her on the snout for nipping me unexpectedly, ingrained reaction from years of kickboxing and boxing when you get hit... hit back. And I'd probably throw something at her if it was a life or death situation and I was out of better options.

I get it, is what I'm saying!

But those aren't training methods, they're desperation moves. Why would you teach that, hold seminars and include it, post youtube videos where you advocate that?

If you care enough to learn from any of the above, there are a whole host of better options to learn across the spectrum from pure positive to compulsion and everything in between. 

The question of how do I stop X behavior is a simple google search away, part of that answer should include managing the situation to prevent said behavior. With an implied understanding that you do what you must to protect your dog from death. You don't need to build an entire method to train people who won't train their dog to explain that. It's a classic catch 22.

But bottom line for me is, somebody is getting money for a youtube video where he tells you to throw stuff at your out of control dogs head. And somebody actually comes on a dog specific forum full of people and resources that could probably teach you how to train your dog to drive and advocates in it's favor. :|

(OK the driving part may be a slight exaggeration lol)


----------



## Jenny720

Chip I hope you will get that Gary Wilkes only marketed a instinctual impulsive behavior by an owner that should not proudly displayed. I chucked things across the room and was not a rolled up towel but what Gary Wilkes did was take that in the moment decision and market it. Completely cheesy. Chucking things across the room is not going to fix anything long term. A strong dog will not even notice anything hit him or a soft dog will be incredibly confused on what just happened and a spooky dog's trust will be quickly diminished. Again, cheesy of him to put his name on a desperate action. They should discontinue the marketing of the bonker like they did with the candy.


----------



## Sunsilver

I agree, Jenny!


----------



## Muskeg

Yes, the thing with physical corrections is, if you want to succeed, with a strong dog, you really have to be all in and understand what you are doing. If you're not dealing with a strong dog, there are other ways, and the bonker wouldn't be on my list. 

There are "act of God" corrections that can stop a behavior for good, then and there, but usually, that's because you got lucky and the dog made the connection. Not because that's how it generally works. 

I've seen enough dogs get seriously quilled by a porcupine, and go back again for more, to know that dogs don't always make the connections you'd think they would. Or hope they would. That's where teaching and training come in to play.


----------



## Jenny720

Porcupine quills , invading a chihuahua space and getting chihuahua fangs similar to a copperhead snake sinking into a soft big black nose. It must be similar to going for big piece of chocolate cake when you know you shouldn't.


----------



## Sunsilver

Had a dog that LOOVED to go after skunks. Had her out for a walk one night, off leash. We both saw the skunk at about the same time. I immediately barked out 'TASHA -DOWN!', and she obeyed instantly.

Let's hear it for training! 

When I got the leash on her collar, and my heart rate began to return to normal, I gave her a ton of praise.

I never walked her off leash on garbage night again. A neighbour on the next block had a skunk den underneath his porch, so there were always skunks out foraging on garbage night. And I made sure she stayed pretty darn close to me on non-garbage nights, too.


----------



## cdwoodcox

About 12 yrs ago I had two kids in youth football and a daughter in youth cheerleading. I would hang out at the football fields with the other dads. Help out if needed or just BS. My wife helped coach the cheer girls. On one occasion my 2 yr old son was over with my wife when I got a phone call that he was heading my way. No big deal he has went back and forth many times. So I knew I had a few minutes. Well this time he must have sprinted. Cause I was talking to another dad when I look up and see my 2 yr old about 8 feet from crossing a parking lot road that got him to me. The problem was that there was also a car coming. So I said STOP to which the kid kept running. So my only option was to take the football I had in my hand and throw it at the kid to stop him from getting hit by a car. It worked. Perfect spiral, dead center hit. Dropped the kid on his butt. Car went by kid got up and immediately ran all the way back to mommy. Let me tell ya she wasn't too happy. 
That is my bonker experience. It worked, kid was safe, recovered in a matter of minutes. Or once mom made it better. I caught an ear full. All the dads was like nice throw. Probably saved that kids life. But that was the extent of it. I didn't make footballs part of my parenting strategy.


----------



## cloudpump

cdwoodcox said:


> About 12 yrs ago I had two kids in youth football and a daughter in youth cheerleading. I would hang out at the football fields with the other dads. Help out if needed or just BS. My wife helped coach the cheer girls. On one occasion my 2 yr old son was over with my wife when I got a phone call that he was heading my way. No big deal he has went back and forth many times. So I knew I had a few minutes. Well this time he must have sprinted. Cause I was talking to another dad when I look up and see my 2 yr old about 8 feet from crossing a parking lot road that got him to me. The problem was that there was also a car coming. So I said STOP to which the kid kept running. So my only option was to take the football I had in my hand and throw it at the kid to stop him from getting hit by a car. It worked. Perfect spiral, dead center hit. Dropped the kid on his butt. Car went by kid got up and immediately ran all the way back to mommy. Let me tell ya she wasn't too happy.
> That is my bonker experience. It worked, kid was safe, recovered in a matter of minutes. Or once mom made it better. I caught an ear full. All the dads was like nice throw. Probably saved that kids life. But that was the extent of it. I didn't make footballs part of my parenting strategy.


Should have made a parenting video. If gary can make a living off bonking dogs, you could make a living off bonking kids


----------



## cdwoodcox

cloudpump said:


> cdwoodcox said:
> 
> 
> 
> About 12 yrs ago I had two kids in youth football and a daughter in youth cheerleading. I would hang out at the football fields with the other dads. Help out if needed or just BS. My wife helped coach the cheer girls. On one occasion my 2 yr old son was over with my wife when I got a phone call that he was heading my way. No big deal he has went back and forth many times. So I knew I had a few minutes. Well this time he must have sprinted. Cause I was talking to another dad when I look up and see my 2 yr old about 8 feet from crossing a parking lot road that got him to me. The problem was that there was also a car coming. So I said STOP to which the kid kept running. So my only option was to take the football I had in my hand and throw it at the kid to stop him from getting hit by a car. It worked. Perfect spiral, dead center hit. Dropped the kid on his butt. Car went by kid got up and immediately ran all the way back to mommy. Let me tell ya she wasn't too happy.
> That is my bonker experience. It worked, kid was safe, recovered in a matter of minutes. Or once mom made it better. I caught an ear full. All the dads was like nice throw. Probably saved that kids life. But that was the extent of it. I didn't make footballs part of my parenting strategy.
> 
> 
> 
> Should have made a parenting video. If gary can make a living off bonking dogs, you could make a living off bonking kids
Click to expand...

Or land in the clinker.


----------



## cloudpump

cdwoodcox said:


> Or land in the clinker.


So you're saying bonkng is abusive? Kidding


----------



## cdwoodcox

I don't think it's abuse. Unless you tape a padlock or a roll of quarters up in the towel "prison style". But how else are you going to get any distance. Even then I can't come close accurate wise as my e-collar. I suppose I could buy one of those guns that shoots the t shirts out in the crowds. 
Honestly though. I don't really care how people train or discipline their dogs. I don't want some PO trainer telling me that an e-collar, fur saver, or prong is not the way to train my dog. I'll use what I want. So if this Gary guy makes a living throwing towels at dogs so be it. Not my thing but evidently some people are cool with it. I do think that it is severely limiting. And with a Google search I could not find any videos of Gary with a Shepherd, rottie, doberman, any dog that may have said screw you and your towel. And skittish/nervous dogs I could see this technique making them even more nervous. I would prefer to train the behavior out of the dog. Not try and scare the dog out of the behavior.


----------



## Chip18

Tennessee said:


> Serious question is your writing style intentional?


Well the people have spoken I see and they say yes, yes it is. Who am I to argue??? But inasmuch as I do learn from others despite what some may feel. Words from a "former member come to mind "If people don't like my post, they don't have to read them. 

But for those that care if they want "clarification" on a point they just "PM" because in PM's ... I don't have to do "stuff" like this. 






Tennessee said:


> But about bonkers, are you seriously advocating as a legitimate training method on which to base a career roughly "if you've lost control of your dog, throw stuff at its head"?


NO, I never said "Bonking is a Training Method," maybe that is how Gary Wilkes uses it? "All the time" but you know I don't care. I recommend "Bonking" in specific cases for specific issue as a "Correction!" If you don't have a door bolting, counter surfing, yard escaping dog and if you are engaged with your dog and actually know how to train a dog, then you don't need a "Bonker" so don't worry about it ... I don't post for you! 

If you have an "issue" with the "Bonker" as a training methodology??? Then take that up with Gary Wilkes ... you know where he is ... I'd also add ... "Good Luck With That" he does not bare tools well, just saying. 


But whatever, I know I made my point clearly, because I have seen the replies. And sure fives of people do understand what I am saying, that is good enough for me.


----------



## Tennessee

Chip18 said:


> Well the people have spoken I see and they say yes, yes it is. Who am I to argue??? But inasmuch as I do learn from others despite what some may feel. Words from a "former member come to mind "If people don't like my post, they don't have to read them.
> 
> But for those that care if they want "clarification" on a point they just "PM" because in PM's ... I don't have to do "stuff" like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, I never said "Bonking is a Training Method," maybe that is how Gary Wilkes uses it? "All the time" but you know I don't care. I recommend "Bonking" in specific cases for specific issue as a "Correction!" If you don't have a door bolting, counter surfing, yard escaping dog and if you are engaged with your dog and actually know how to train a dog, then you don't need a "Bonker" so don't worry about it ... I don't post for you!
> 
> If you have an "issue" with the "Bonker" as a training methodology??? Then take that up with Gary Wilkes ... you know where he is ... I'd also add ... "Good Luck With That" he does not bare tools well, just saying.
> 
> 
> But whatever, I know I made my point clearly, because I have seen the replies. And sure fives of people do understand what I am saying, that is good enough for me.


It's bear not bare, but I suppose if someone was mean to me on the internet i might cry myself to sleep tonight. Lol


----------



## voodoolamb

Chip18 said:


> If you have an "issue" with the "Bonker" as a training methodology??? Then take that up with Gary Wilkes ... you know where he is ... I'd also add ... "Good Luck With That" he does not bare tools well, just saying.


Did you just call everyone who disagrees with using a bonker a "tool"?

That was a bit of a low blow...


----------



## cloudpump

voodoolamb said:


> Did you just call everyone who disagrees with using a bonker a "tool"?
> 
> That was a bit of a low blow...


And fools:
"
And they will see my note ... to ask him and be "respectful" because he does not bare fools well!! You have been warned! "


----------



## Chip18

voodoolamb said:


> Did you just call everyone who disagrees with using a bonker a "tool"?
> 
> That was a bit of a low blow...


OH ... good catch if I did ... that was not my intent! So my bad ... I do have a flair for the dramatic! So I suppose I meant ... if one does actually post a question to him ... and for the record no one here does. Be respectful ...because he does not bare "tools" well. That ...is what I meant but you know ... "anyone" here is free to ask him ... the same silly crap they are asking me. And then they can see how well that "crap flies with him." Just saying. 





And then they can


----------



## LuvShepherds

cloudpump said:


> And fools:
> "
> And they will see my note ... to ask him and be "respectful" because he does not bare fools well!! You have been warned! "


Bare? Naked tools?


----------



## Chip18

Aww well change it to "suffer fools gladly" if one prefers, ... I don't really care, as "No One" here bothers anyway.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

Chip18 said:


> OH ... good catch if I did ... that was not my intent! So my bad ... I do have a flair for the dramatic! So I suppose I meant ... if one does actually post a question to him ... and for the record no one here does. Be respectful ...because he does not bare "tools" well. That ...is what I meant but you know ... *"anyone" here is free to ask him ... the same silly crap they are asking me. *And then they can see how well that "crap flies with him." Just saying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And then they can


Can you explain that in the red for me please? What do you consider silly crap and why?

And just for the record, I have spoke with Gary Wilkes and we have discussed a few things. I found him polite and very willing to explain himself.


----------



## Tennessee

Chip18 said:


> Aww well change it to "suffer fools gladly" if one prefers, ... I don't really care, as "No One" here bothers anyway.


Well most don't seek out obvious fools and shysters for general wisdom nor care to get in squabbles with those who are also easily offended. 

And it's not cause we're wrong or scared of his apparently epicly witty repartees.


----------



## cliffson1

I think there is some very good knowledge in this thread....and I think common sense will access most of it....shrug?*♀


----------



## cliffson1

I will say this, ( as Slamdunc also said), I have found that the more extreme uses of corrections are better utilized by people with substantial experience in dog training. This is because corrections are a two edged sword in that they can help an extreme situation, but they can also cause lasting negative effects when used wrongly or with wrong dog.


----------



## wombat

cliffson1 said:


> I will say this, ( as Slamdunc also said), I have found that the more extreme uses of corrections are better utilized by people with substantial experience in dog training. This is because corrections are a two edged sword in that they can help an extreme situation, but they can also cause lasting negative effects when used wrongly or with wrong dog.


I've been monitoring this thread with interest.

I see a lot of knee-jerk cruelty reactions when people see physical force used as a punishment and I've not been certain that I agree. I've been hesitant to say lest I be labelled as an animal abuser, but my parents raised me with physical correction as an option - of course on reflection I controlled when this option was deployed. 

I therefore cannot agree that physical correction that causes transient pain that is done with the intention of training a dog to be safe is cruel.

I do agree that in most cases it is unnecessary, and if you're having to get physical regularly there is possibly an issue there that requires a third party to assist with.

What I have found, almost unfailingly, is that my pup has seen any physical intervention or correction I have tried as a game. This is no doubt because the tool was in the hands of an amateur (me) and it therefore stands to reason that physical correction is a high-risk tool in the hands of an amateur - too much force and you injure the dog, too little and you don't have the desired effect.

I cannot think of an instance where a deliberate positive reinforcement I have made has been misinterpreted by my dog.

Therefore, I would charitably say 'live and let live' - if it works for Wilkes (and I see no evidence to the contrary and have yet to be set straight on this if I am missing something), good for him. But in the hands of amateurs, and certainly my own, this type of physical correction just seems to be counter productive.

Thank you for having this discussion and helping me reach this conclusion 

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Slamdunc

wombat said:


> I've been monitoring this thread with interest.
> 
> I see a lot of knee-jerk cruelty reactions when people see physical force used as a punishment and I've not been certain that I agree. I've been hesitant to say lest I be labelled as an animal abuser, but my parents raised me with physical correction as an option - of course on reflection I controlled when this option was deployed.
> 
> I therefore cannot agree that physical correction that causes transient pain that is done with the intention of training a dog to be safe is cruel.
> 
> I do agree that in most cases it is unnecessary, and if you're having to get physical regularly there is possibly an issue there that requires a third party to assist with.
> 
> What I have found, almost unfailingly, is that my pup has seen any physical intervention or correction I have tried as a game. This is no doubt because the tool was in the hands of an amateur (me) and it therefore stands to reason that physical correction is a high-risk tool in the hands of an amateur - too much force and you injure the dog, too little and you don't have the desired effect.
> 
> I cannot think of an instance where a deliberate positive reinforcement I have made has been misinterpreted by my dog.
> 
> Therefore, I would charitably say 'live and let live' - if it works for Wilkes (and I see no evidence to the contrary and have yet to be set straight on this if I am missing something), good for him. But in the hands of amateurs, and certainly my own, this type of physical correction just seems to be counter productive.
> 
> Thank you for having this discussion and helping me reach this conclusion
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


My issue with this technique is that it is a "Knee jerk" response to what a dog does. This technique is not going to save any dogs lives. It is not going to stop a behavior that is truly dangerous. Unless, of course an owner carries a large rolled up towel every where they go, which is not practical. 

I don't think this is a reliable and effective training technique at all. Like most other things it will take repetition and hitting the dog in the head repeatedly to become effective. I am not against compulsion and I certainly believe in correcting a dog for disobedience. I have many training techniques that I use, some I will not post on internet forums do to the nuances of the technique. I train motivationally, but I work with some serious dogs that need serious control. "Bonking" these dogs would be a joke. They need a much firmer, fairer and consistent approach to training to work. 

I don not know any trainers that are serious about working with dogs that would ever recommend this approach. 

If you are working with a poodle, spaniel, pug, this may work but is it really necessary and effective. Can't a correction be delivered in a better more effective way. Again, we are always talking about compulsion. What about shaping behaviors, praise and reward for correct behaviors? What about actually taking the time and patience to train a dog, build a bond, mutual respect and trust. I can tell you, I'd have an issue working for some jerk that threw stuff at my head. :wink2: Rather than teach me how to perform correctly.


----------



## wombat

Slamdunc said:


> My issue with this technique is that it is a "Knee jerk" response to what a dog does. This technique is not going to save any dogs lives. It is not going to stop a behavior that is truly dangerous. Unless, of course an owner carries a large rolled up towel every where they go, which is not practical.
> 
> I don't think this is a reliable and effective training technique at all. Like most other things it will take repetition and hitting the dog in the head repeatedly to become effective. I am not against compulsion and I certainly believe in correcting a dog for disobedience. I have many training techniques that I use, some I will not post on internet forums do to the nuances of the technique. I train motivationally, but I work with some serious dogs that need serious control. "Bonking" these dogs would be a joke. They need a much firmer, fairer and consistent approach to training to work.
> 
> I don not know any trainers that are serious about working with dogs that would ever recommend this approach.
> 
> If you are working with a poodle, spaniel, pug, this may work but is it really necessary and effective. Can't a correction be delivered in a better more effective way. Again, we are always talking about compulsion. What about shaping behaviors, praise and reward for correct behaviors? What about actually taking the time and patience to train a dog, build a bond, mutual respect and trust. I can tell you, I'd have an issue working for some jerk that threw stuff at my head. :wink2: Rather than teach me how to perform correctly.


I agree with what you are promoting in principle, and as an amateur I believe your approach is the safest option for me 

However I still see no evidence (other than the word of an internet stranger) that this doesn't work. It's not that I doubt your credentials, but what I hear is "I'm an expert and I believe this technique will not work".

What I hear from others is "I'm an expert and I believe this technique will work".

What follows is then either an agreement to disagree or a measuring contest of who is the bigger expert with more time served and more relevant experience. I've heard of similar contests before:

10 martial arts masters are all gathered around promoting their own styles as the best in the world - "boxing is best!", "no, wrestling is best!" and so on... 

Then a stranger approaches and tells all 10 masters he will beat them if only he can dictate the environment. Each confident in their own system, they all agree...

...turns out he was a water polo player, and his environment was a swimming pool.

I'm sure I don't have to tell anybody the moral of the story here, but I stand by my decision to live and let live until I see some empirical evidence that bonking does not and can not work for anybody.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve Strom

Look at this Wombat:





What do you see accomplished there? Just so there's no doubt, I'll say up front I'm not an expert. I'm just on the internet.


----------



## Muskeg

Just watch the expression of the blond woman in the upper left while Gary Wilkes is spouting on about women.... deadpan.

Also, if Wilkes was sitting on the floor like that and tried that with my serious male, he'd get at minimum a growl. He would certainly not get grovelling and appeasement. Even my female would tell him in no uncertain terms that this was an unfair correction. Stupid position to be in unless you 100% trust that dog. A towel won't cut it...

Moreover, and what gets me the most, is he hasn't taught the dog anything. Let's be honest, he hit that dog, he didn't bonk it, and the dog didn't learn anything except that this man is unpredictable and not to be trusted. 

I don't doubt Wilkes might have some dog training knowledge to pass on, but I don't like this video. At all. 

If this is bonking, I want no part of it, even for "just" pet type dogs. Yuck.


----------



## Galathiel

You know, I found that video disturbing. He didn't teach anything before he went to punishment. Is that how he "teaches" impulse control?


----------



## Slamdunc

Wombat,
I think Steve's post above explains my problem with this method. In my opinion, it is a poor training method, if you can even call it a training method. It is borderline abusive. In my experience, it is unnecessary and a poor training technique. I am by far not a soft trainer and if I thought there was any merit in smashing a dog over the head I'd use it. This guy hasn't got a clue about dog training from what I've seen. 

Do as you wish, use what works for you. I use my hands for praising and petting, I don't hit dogs across the head for nudging my hands for a treat. I do not make the dogs I train cower, fearful, or come back to me because they are afraid of what will happen next. This is a gimmick to get a result that you can show an audience of amateurs in a seminar and change a behavior quickly. Then he can say "gee, look at how good I am, this dog won't do that anymore!" Until, the dog gets home and recovers from the shock. Some folks watching will think this is a great method and believe this guy really knows what he is doing. It's a bunch of crap, and seeing that video really annoys me. It baffles me that anyone would endorse that clown. It baffles me that anyone would let this moron even touch their dog. 

I would really like to see him do that to a tougher dog. I have two he is welcome to try it with, one is 11 1/2 years old and will take his treats and eat his lunch. Before that would ever happen, to save him the ER visit, I'd just take the towel and bonk him a time or two. Just to see how he likes it. 

_Being a moderator, I feel the need to temper my responses and not really say what I think of Gary Wilkes and his "bonker." I'm sure people will get the point that I am not a fan._


----------



## Slamdunc

Wombat,
You wrote:
*However I still see no evidence (other than the word of an internet stranger) that this doesn't work. It's not that I doubt your credentials, but what I hear is "I'm an expert and I believe this technique will not work".

What I hear from others is "I'm an expert and I believe this technique will work".*

I'd really like to know what "_expert_" thinks this technique is valid, fair and sound. Or that it is one that works? 

If you know dog behavior, can ready body language and understand how to effectively train a dog, the video posted above says it all. I noticed that comments are disabled for the video as well, go figure.


----------



## Muskeg

Another video of bonking. If anything, this one is worse:


----------



## GypsyGhost

I can't believe anyone would think this method is a good thing to try. Look at the body language of the dogs after. Who wants to do that to their dog? My dogs NEVER look like that during training, and I am not against physical corrections at all.


----------



## Pirates Lair

Slamdunc said:


> Wombat,
> I think Steve's post above explains my problem with this method. In my opinion, it is a poor training method, if you can even call it a training method. It is borderline abusive. In my experience, it is unnecessary and a poor training technique. I am by far not a soft trainer and if I thought there was any merit in smashing a dog over the head I'd use it. This guy hasn't got a clue about dog training from what I've seen.
> 
> Do as you wish, use what works for you. I use my hands for praising and petting, I don't hit dogs across the head for nudging my hands for a treat. I do not make the dogs I train cower, fearful, or come back to me because they are afraid of what will happen next. This is a gimmick to get a result that you can show an audience of amateurs in a seminar and change a behavior quickly. Then he can say "gee, look at how good I am, this dog won't do that anymore!" Until, the dog gets home and recovers from the shock. Some folks watching will think this is a great method and believe this guy really knows what he is doing. It's a bunch of crap, and seeing that video really annoys me. It baffles me that anyone would endorse that clown. It baffles me that anyone would let this moron even touch their dog.
> 
> I would really like to see him do that to a tougher dog. I have two he is welcome to try it with, one is 11 1/2 years old and will take his treats and eat his lunch. Before that would ever happen, to save him the ER visit, I'd just take the towel and bonk him a time or two. Just to see how he likes it.
> 
> _Being a moderator, I feel the need to temper my responses and not really say what I think of Gary Wilkes and his "bonker." I'm sure people will get the point that I am not a fan._



Great Post Jim!

I just became aware of this "bonkers" video last night. I'm not sure who is worse...the so called idiot trainers or the morons who buy into this abusive crap!

I'm the first one to give a hard correction to a dog that requires a "hard and fair correction" in order to obtain compliance for the safety of the dog and other people.

Anyone with half a brain who knows anything about anything can see the fear exhibited by those dogs.

I sure hope the people who condone this type of training are spayed/neutered as not to pass on their genes. We have enough oxygen thieves walking around as it is.



Kim


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

This reminds me a little of this other thing I saw-

I wish I had a link for a Jeff Gellman video I saw recently where he said "now tell the owner ahead of time that the dog is going to vocalize" 

waited for it this lab to jump, nailed him as hard as he could with both hands on the leash to a prong collar, and then edited the clip to cut out just as the dog screamed. Come on, if you want to own it then own it. Don't cut the clip to try and make it seem like the dog didn't really yell with you did that to him for something he didn't even know he wasn't supposed to do.

The one where he hit the rescue for trying to nudge his hand for food was pretty upsetting.


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

and I bet that doodle dog is afraid of men holding things now. because that's productive


----------



## voodoolamb

Muskeg said:


> Another video of bonking. If anything, this one is worse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I3TMl64lbc


So I started this thread mostly in jest, with the thought that bonking at best is ridiculous. The dogs that it will work on probably don't need it and the rest of the dogs... forgehdaboutit. 

But the stuff wilkes spouted off on in that last video, the snarking about the rebound aggression, that borders on absolute dangerous advice. 

I too would like to see Wilkes do this with a harder dog. Of a breed that has been selected for human aggression. I've had a lot of pits, I could have knocked them out with a two by four and when they came to, they would have crawled into my lap with the feedme-petme-loveme eyes. My GSD though... he has come up the leash on what he felt was an unfair correction. In rough play he has come with teeth. And he isn't even all that hard of a dog either. Had he been bonked like the dogs in these videos... especially by a strange man... there would have been a very real chance of a bite. 

In other news... My throw pillow experiment is still a dismal failure. I continue to melt because someone noses the AC vent in a way that is stops blowing in my direction during his make out sessions. I expect half GSD half LG pups any day now... Do the extension cord tails need to be docked?


----------



## voodoolamb

Thecowboysgirl said:


> This reminds me a little of this other thing I saw-
> 
> I wish I had a link for a Jeff Gellman video I saw recently where he said "now tell the owner ahead of time that the dog is going to vocalize"
> 
> waited for it this lab to jump, nailed him as hard as he could with both hands on the leash to a prong collar, and then edited the clip to cut out just as the dog screamed. Come on, if you want to own it then own it. Don't cut the clip to try and make it seem like the dog didn't really yell with you did that to him for something he didn't even know he wasn't supposed to do.
> 
> The one where he hit the rescue for trying to nudge his hand for food was pretty upsetting.


If you start looking for Gellman videos, keep your eyes peeled for the loose leash walking one with the rottweiler and the prong.

The timing on the corrections was HORRIBLE. More than once he gave a leash correction _while the dog was actually thinking things through and doing the RIGHT thing - the thing he was actually trying to teach the dog to do._.


----------



## Steve Strom

Well, what do you think Wombat? lIstenin !! to un?? known expetrs?? Or believe your own eyes?


----------



## wombat

Steve Strom said:


> Look at this Wombat:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YSu11hBCZg
> 
> What do you see accomplished there? Just so there's no doubt, I'll say up front I'm not an expert. I'm just on the internet.


Well I'll start by saying that I am, at best, a layman in dog body language - though I'm eager to learn more as my pup is very communicative and cooperative and I'm up for anything that can improve the way I capitalise on that.

What I see in that video is a dog showing an undesirable behaviour get bonked over the head and show no signs of injury or stress. The undesirable behaviour stops and does not resume.

Again, I will say that I'm a layman and if someone can point me to cues that I'm missing from the dog then I'll happily take a second look.

I've seen far more disturbing footage, and I've seen dogs correct each other more harshly. At the minute I'm not sure I have a moral basis for objecting to that video as others do.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Slamdunc

The signs of stress are clearly there. I don't think the dog was physically injured, but in the dog's mind it was severe. 

My whole point is that it is unnecessary and the same result can be obtained through far better methods in a much clearer and fairer way to the dog.


----------



## Steve Strom

wombat said:


> Well I'll start by saying that I am, at best, a layman in dog body language - though I'm eager to learn more as my pup is very communicative and cooperative and I'm up for anything that can improve the way I capitalise on that.
> 
> What I see in that video is a dog showing an undesirable behaviour get bonked over the head and show no signs of injury or stress. The undesirable behaviour stops and does not resume.
> 
> Again, I will say that I'm a layman and if someone can point me to cues that I'm missing from the dog then I'll happily take a second look.
> 
> I've seen far more disturbing footage, and I've seen dogs correct each other more harshly. At the minute I'm not sure I have a moral basis for objecting to that video as others do.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


What you're seeing is a dog going holey moses, what did I do ? Please don't do that again, with no clear association to what he was hit for. You mentioned productive earlier. There was nothing productive there. Dogs have a sense of fairness and for corrections to be productive, they have to be fair in their mind. What did I do to get clobbered isn't fair. He didn't stop an undesirable behavior, he created one that hopefully the dog recovers from. I'm not taking a moral position on it, just watching it, I think it was at best stupid.


----------



## dogma13

I haven't bonked my dogs.But I did yank Samson's tail once when we were out in the yard and a cat appeared out of the brush across the road and trotted away down the middle of the road.Just too tempting!So it was "Leave It!" and a tug on the tail.Startled him just long enough to break him out of chase mode.Then an immediate "Heel!" and off to the back yard to chase a ball safely.New training technique?Only if I wanted to train him to keep his tail safely tucked all of the time


----------



## wombat

Steve Strom said:


> What you're seeing is a dog going holey moses, what did I do ? Please don't do that again, with no clear association to what he was hit for. You mentioned productive earlier. There was nothing productive there. Dogs have a sense of fairness and for corrections to be productive, they have to be fair in their mind. What did I do to get clobbered isn't fair. He didn't stop an undesirable behavior, he created one that hopefully the dog recovers from. I'm not taking a moral position on it, just watching it, I think it was at best stupid.


Ok, I don't see what you see. Nor am I in a position to judge why we see different things - inexperience on my part or confirmation bias on your part? 

I'll wait for the white paper with interest.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve Strom

Confirmation bias?


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

I agree with Slamdunc so, so much. Especially when after he whacks that pit or boxer or whatever the first one is, the dog goes on to sniff his hand holding the food which he ignores. Then he hides that hand away from the dog. This just seems inconsistent on top of the original correction being unfair. I doubt the dog was even able to put it together.

and then the poor thing crawling in his lap and he pays himself on the back that it still likes him. Like others said, appeasement behaviors. Lots of dogs out there will still kiss you and try to be our friend even after you kick them. Sad but true. doesn't make it right or ok.


----------



## Tennessee

That's so terribly bad it's almost funny. 

That takes a special kind of stupid to think that man knows what he's talking about and his training methods are sound.


----------



## Magwart

I can't get over ASKING the dog to jump up by patting the chest in order to set it up to be whacked for jumping up. So stinking unfair.


----------



## GypsyGhost

Magwart said:


> I can't get over ASKING the dog to jump up by patting the chest in order to set it up to be whacked for jumping up. So stinking unfair.


I know. Way to build trust. That poor dog is never going to know which way is up.


----------



## Slamdunc

@wombat,
I actually appreciate your comments and your perspective. For anyone else wondering why I do not like this training technique, or are wondering about it's effectiveness, please comment. Wombat has made some very excellent posts and has the desire to question what folks are saying. I get it and I applaud it. That is something that many will not do, they will lurk and watch what happens. Potentially never getting the right answer, clearing up confusion, or wondering what to do wth their dog. This forum is an excellent place to ask questions and in turn question the posters and see what makes sense to you. 

I do not consider myself an expert, I certainly do not know everything about dogs. I am here like others to learn and discuss GSD's and training. I am open to new concepts and hearing what others do. I do have some experience and have had my hands on a few dogs. I will question training, techniques and methods that I am unfamiliar with or feel are unfair; as we all should do. This is a very polite and friendly dog forum as far as forums go. There is excellent information to be offered and knowledge to be gained and shared. Please do not hesitate to post or question members in a friendly fashion as you see fit. 

For those reading and confused or not sure of the topic, please post a question. There are many people here that can help answer your questions. Training and behavior modification is something that I have a huge interest in and will be glad to answer questions on something I have hands on experience with.


----------



## Baillif

There is nothing wrong with setting a dog up to fail if the purpose is to teach an inhibition. None of my dogs counter surf. I can leave sandwiches and hotdogs or steak on the side of a counter and then walk out of the room and my dogs will sniff at it but will not take it. Why? Because when they were younger I would set them up by baiting the counter and if they attempted to obtain the food that way they would be punished. If they decided not to mess with it often it would end up on the ground for them to obtain that way. There is an inhibition to counter surf by physical punishment being the end result of attempting to obtain food by counter surfing. They were set up to fail. In that failure they learned what NOT to do.

Punishment teaches what not to do. Positive punishment and negative punishment are quadrants of operant conditioning in LEARNING theory. Bonking is mostly positive punishment and by bonking a dog the dog is learning. 

My personal take on it is this. I think the approach Gary uses lacks tact. I tend to lead off with several "slap on the wrist style" corrections that are naggy more than anything to allow the dog to learn the exact action that is getting him in trouble. If you go too hard too fast what ends up happening is you do get a temporary stopage of the current behavior because you are essentially stopping all behavior in that moment. The dog doesn't necessarily have it pinned down what was wrong in that moment, he is just suppressed from carrying out that or many other actions. When you lead off with naggy corrections you are annoying the dog and temporarily suspending the target action but because it is mild the dog will usually try again and it gets you another couple of quick correction reps so that the dog is able to pin down exactly what behavior is causing the action. Then you can start stepping up intensity of the correction to knock the behavior out of the repertoire. The dog learns way faster has less stress in the end and you end up with smaller chances of causing superstitious associations. When you nail down which target behavior is being punished you will end up stopping just that behavior even if you punished at a high level and the stress level will be a lot lower with that higher level correction because the dog will know why it happened and because he knows how to avoid it it isn't all that stressful a situation to them anymore.

The other thing is it is better for the relationship and balance you have with a dog. If the dog sees you as ranked too high in regard to him you start to see way too many supplication and submissive gestures from the dog. You have to balance that back out with play and affection at some point or it affects the relationship adversely. It isn't irreversible by any means but I have seen people screw this up and create dogs that did way too much walking on eggshells around their handler.


----------



## Baillif

Give you an example. I stick an e collar on a dog because the dog keeps pulling food out of the trash. Out of 100 levels I have the dog at say 10-15 at first. The dog goes to stick his nose in there and stim. Dog stops for a second maybe scratches his neck or looks around for a second but because it wasn't that big of a deal goes back into the can and right in that moment stim again. Maybe the dog walks away and comes back a minute later sticks his nose back in there and stim again. After 5-6 reps of this the next time I see the dog about to stick his nose in the can i go to 40-50 and boom. That stops it for a while maybe the rest of the day maybe only an hour but that dog will know why it is happening and there will be little if any fall out with that dog.

On the flip side. The dog is right about to stick his head in the trash can and right from the start i turn the collar to 100 and he sticks his nose in and BAM get him for half a second on continuous. Dog shrieks and takes off across the room probably. He will stop going into the can for a while probably but guess what? Maybe hes afraid of that whole side of the room now. Maybe hes weird about the fridge next to the trashcan now. Maybe hes afraid of the entire room period at that point. It got it done seemingly right away but there is fallout to deal with after and the situation isn't necessarily done because the dog isn't able to pin down what caused the stim.

The dog in the first case that started tactfully maybe a few days later tries for the trashcan and I stim him on 100 just like I did the dog in the second example. He will maybe shriek or run out of there for a second but guess what? He likely wont be weird about what happened because he knows from past history why it occurred and as a result will not get weird about the room or the fridge or whatever and fallout from that situation will likely be low despite receiving the same level correction.


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> What about shaping behaviors, praise and reward for correct behaviors? What about actually taking the time and patience to train a dog, build a bond, mutual respect and trust. I can tell you, I'd have an issue working for some jerk that threw stuff at my head. :wink2: Rather than teach me how to perform correctly.


Well here's to talking at cross purposes, because the owners I am talking about don't, can't or won't train their dog. 

There dogs escape their yards and I round them up and return them if they get lucky and I happen to find them. Or they bolt through the door and I have to defend my dog from loose dogs yet again (and not many pugs, poodles or spaniels) are found "where I live." Or if the dog is not a threat and no owner present I round them up and use a makeshift SLL to walk the dog that they "NEVER" walk ... politely home and return to owner. 

They can't stop there dogs from doing those behaviours that could get them killed, but in five minutes or less ... I can explain how they could. Or better still do it for them, stopping a door bolting dog with a Bonker is not gonna kill my day. And maybe if they can see one behaviour stopped??? Then maybe perhaps possibly they would actually care *"about shaping behaviors, praise and reward for correct behaviors? What about actually taking the time and patience to train a dog, build a bond, mutual respect and trust." *


Because the folks I am speaking for and about have absolutely no idea ... what any of that in blue is about but they still luv their dogs. And as I have done and do say, if they can see success in achieving something tangible by stopping one behaviour, then maybe they will want to know more???

Now if they happen to decide that Gary is the way to go for all things dogs, that is not my call. He also uses a head halter so yeah no, I don't agree with anyone on everything ... that would just be silly??? But hey if people's Gary Wilkes trained dogs stay off my radar ... I'm good with that. 

Beyond that I'll stop giving advice on how people can ask him questions as it's not my job to defend him. He's more than capable of defending himself if required.


----------



## Steve Strom

Baillif said:


> My personal take on it is this. I think the approach Gary uses lacks tact. I tend to lead off with several "slap on the wrist style" corrections that are naggy more than anything to allow the dog to learn the exact action that is getting him in trouble.
> .


I think that lack of tact is the problem. He clobbers him for an obviously minor thing after encouraging it in a calm, reassuring manor. I don't see that as being any where near what your talking about. Its like a lightning strike, but still with a personal touch,all for following his direction. I wonder what they'd do with the electric?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Steve Strom said:


> I think that lack of tact is the problem. He clobbers him for an obviously minor thing after encouraging it in a calm, reassuring manor.


Right, it's one thing to set up a dog in a situation where it _may_ fail, in order to proof a behavior, it's something else entirely to encourage or even cue a dog to do something you don't want it to do so you can then correct it.


----------



## Baillif

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Right, it's one thing to set up a dog in a situation where it _may_ fail, in order to proof a behavior, it's something else entirely to encourage or even cue a dog to do something you don't want it to do so you can then correct it.


No it isn't. Environmental cue, contextual cue, verbal cue, physical cue. If the goal is to teach an inhibition toward a specific action it doesn't matter.


----------



## Steve Strom

Yeah, he inhibited the heck out of that dog.


----------



## Baillif

Yeah and you already know where I stand on his procedure. In theory it is soundish. In practice there is a better way to go.


----------



## Tennessee

wombat said:


> Ok, I don't see what you see. Nor am I in a position to judge why we see different things - inexperience on my part or confirmation bias on your part?
> 
> I'll wait for the white paper with interest.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


ROFL

You work for him or something?


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

I would just like to share with you guys that while I was reading this thread, my dog bonked ME.

he put his chuckit ball in my lap. I picked it up and tossed it to him without looking up and he grabbed wrong, punted it, and it bounced off my nose. LOL

I learned a lesson anyway


----------



## Steve Strom

Did it work? Are you inhibited now?


----------



## wombat

Tennessee said:


> ROFL
> 
> You work for him or something?


So I either agree with you, am stupid or I'm a positive punishment sleeper agent? Those are my options?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Tennessee

wombat said:


> So I either agree with you, am stupid or I'm a positive punishment sleeper agent? Those are my options?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


Nope, but you're asking for white papers before you'll believe someone. 

You're being a smartallek, did you not like when someone talks back to you in the same manner?

Lol


----------



## wombat

Tennessee said:


> Nope, but you're asking for white papers before you'll believe someone.
> 
> You're being a smartallek, did you not like when someone talks back to you in the same manner?
> 
> Lol


I genuinely wasn't - anecdotal evidence is good to keep in mind but I'll never know for sure until a body of research is done on a controlled sampling and a statistical analysis is done. Anything less is subject to emotional interpretation and confirmation bias.

Your assumption and subsequent confirmation that I'm being a smartallek is a good example of confirmation bias, however.... And now I'm being a smartallek - Bataris' box and all.

It wasn't my intention to offend anyone's sensibilities - I'll go back to lurking now as I'm not about to get drawn off topic into a discussion about my writing style.

Kind regards.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Baillif

Steve Strom said:


> Did it work? Are you inhibited now?


The dog should wack her harder next time if not.


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

I believe it did work. Playing with dogs while scrolling on my phone....bad idea.

if it was my other dog I probably would have lost a finger or something

It wasn't as exciting as the time the spitty foam ball on a rope slipped out of his mouth while we were playing tug and flew up and whacked me in the face, slobber and all. I got that one on video ?

I gotta give the old girl some credit though, she is going blind...I released the OTHER dog onto a tug, and she heard the release and saw my arm and through her cataracts thought it was a tug toy I had presented for her to bite, she lunged up and grabbed my bare forearm. I tell ya, life flashed before my eyes for a sec. She has NO bite inhibition but she did realize her mistake and managed to let go without even putting a mark on me. 

If I ever have 2 dogs again like this I will give them different release words


----------



## Slamdunc

@wombat you wrote:

*"anecdotal evidence is good to keep in mind but I'll never know for sure until a body of research is done on a controlled sampling and a statistical analysis is done. Anything less is subject to emotional interpretation and confirmation bias."*

The funny thing is, many of the posters on this forum have conducted a large body of research with a large volume of dogs. Some of us have worked for years, actually with dogs, not just by watching videos on youtube or Facebook. Some of us have been doing research and actually working and training dogs before the youtube and self proclaimed internet experts became a thing. 

The sad reality is that by simply watching that video and seeing what that dolt Wilke did, should be evidence enough. I don't think a degree in dog psychology or a PHD in animal behavior is needed. The research has been done and the papers and books have been written. You just need to do some research, if seeing is not believing for you. Or get your hands on a few dogs, work and train them. Get with some people that actually know how to train dogs and get the results that you like. Be very careful with internet videos, Facebook and self proclaimed internet and forum experts. They are certainly not any type of evidence. I base my evidence on "tests" and not "testimonials." Especially, when the testimonial is based on a sample size of one dog, as we often see from the "forum experts." 

One thing that I have learned is that there are a lot of people that know more about dogs than I do. I never discount anyone, because I have seen many excellent handlers, trainers and breeders on forums and just did not recognize their screen name. With a little experience you can separate the wheat from the chaff and know who is actually offering solid information based on real experience, training and working with dogs. 

Until you have the experience to see the difference, continue to be skeptical, that is truly the right approach.


----------



## LuvShepherds

wombat said:


> I genuinely wasn't - anecdotal evidence is good to keep in mind but I'll never know for sure until a body of research is done on a controlled sampling and a statistical analysis is done. Anything less is subject to emotional interpretation and confirmation bias.
> 
> Your assumption and subsequent confirmation that I'm being a smartallek is a good example of confirmation bias, however.... And now I'm being a smartallek - Bataris' box and all.
> 
> It wasn't my intention to offend anyone's sensibilities - I'll go back to lurking now as I'm not about to get drawn off topic into a discussion about my writing style.
> 
> Kind regards.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


You aren't offending me. Ignore the rude comments, which are too frequent here.


----------



## LuvShepherds

Tennessee said:


> Nope, but you're asking for white papers before you'll believe someone.
> 
> You're being a smartallek, did you not like when someone talks back to you in the same manner?
> 
> Lol


It is not necessary to be rude to someone. If you don't like their post, give better information. Why do people think it's alright to bash others on a forum? Would they do the same in real life? Read Slam's reply to the same person. It was thoughtful and respectful, even if he did not agree.


----------



## Slamdunc

Threads on forums can get heated and one should not be offended easily, especially by strangers on the internet. This is one of the threads that can get personal and cause members to post on a more emotional basis than factual basis. I have pretty strong feelings about the video posted and people without the knowledge and experience to advocate this training. I am not going to make it personal with members and neither should anyone else. 

The problem becomes is that sometimes these threads cause people to lurk and not post. There could be a dozen people with the same question, but are too afraid or embarrassed to ask it. That doesn't help or benefit anyone. There should be an open conversation and exchange of ideas on all types of training. This "bonking" technique has been advocated on here several times, this thread brought it to light in a different way. 

There are dog owners of all skill levels here, from first time owners to successful breeders, handlers, competitors and trainers. We need to discuss training in a polite and positive way. Sharing ideas and thoughts in a friendly environment. On occasion it may become heated. It's the internet and you can't take this too seriously or be offended too easily. Let's all get along and discuss opposing views in a polite manner.


----------



## Magwart

Well, if you want peer-reviewed, journal-published science, then you should probably be reading the research by diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists. They actually _do _research and publish on how dogs learn.

Their research has found over and over that reward-based training gets superior results. That's discussed in a book called _Decoding Your Dog_ that the ACVB published in 2014 -- it's written for the dog owning public, offering evidence-based behavior suggestions:
https://www.amazon.com/Decoding-Your-Dog-Explaining-Behaviors/dp/0544334604/

It's easy to find quibbles with the book, but if you want to see where the veterinary science-driven approaches are headed, this is the voice of the ACVB. Patricia McConnell wrote a pretty good review of it, when it came out:
Decoding Your Dog: A Book Review


----------



## Baillif

Top monied dog behavioral researchers advocate force free training methods. The top monied dog trainers are using a balanced approach that incorporates positive punishment. Theory vs reality. Researchers get paid to write and publish papers and get grants to do studies. They don't get paid to get results with a dog. 

Not saying anything against science but all too often the money is being thrown at people that tell us what we want to hear or at the very least tell us what can get the most attention. 

I only ever get involved in these threads because the science behind what Gary does is correct, and often the theory gets bashed because the application of it is crap in his case.


----------



## Slamdunc

Baillif said:


> Top monied dog behavioral researchers advocate force free training methods. The top monied dog trainers are using a balanced approach that incorporates positive punishment. Theory vs reality. Researchers get paid to write and publish papers and get grants to do studies. They don't get paid to get results with a dog.
> 
> Not saying anything against science but all too often the money is being thrown at people that tell us what we want to hear or at the very least tell us what can get the most attention.
> 
> I only ever get involved in these threads because the science behind what Gary does is correct, and often the theory gets bashed because the application of it is crap in his case.


You are very correct and spot on.

While the science may be correct, the application, approach and use in this case with Wilke is crap. I'm not against correcting a dog. It just has to be done in a way that is fair to the dog. Smashing a dog in the head for sniffing a treat in his hand was just idiotic. 

I believe a good correction is one that stops a behavior immediately, and one that the dog remembers later on today, tomorrow, next week and next month. I also believe it is unfair to correct a dog for a behavior it has not been taught. The other big thing that must happen after a correction is the proper level of praise and reward, timed perfectly the instant the dog is performing properly. The praise and reward must be at a much higher level and of more value than the correction was to the dog. That seems to be what most people miss. 

The science may be correct. But when people use techniques in a poor and incorrect fashion, with little understanding of the actual result and consequences it is a big problem. Then others see that and think, "gee this guy is great" look at what he did in 5 minutes, then start advocating it on forums as gospel, we have another problem. 

Then you have the "so called" dog trainers with their youtube videos trying to teach the "bonker"concept as well. The response is that this technique "saves dogs." Another bunch of BS! A dog is going to be saved from being PTS because he got it's head smashed for jumping on it's owner, what a load of crap. This is not rattlesnake proofing, which could actually save a dog's life. If an owner is that inept and stupid that they have no other option than to smash a dog in the head for jumping, then they do not need to own any animals. Goes hand in hand with the statements that someone will euthanize a dog for jumping, and this is saving dogs. Good Grief.


----------



## Steve Strom

Maybe my confirmation bias is showing again, but its always the application. People write all kinds of great stuff Wombat, lets see them with the leash in their hands, or in this case the towel. Its not anecdotal, believe what you see. Things are a lot simpler then you're thinking.


----------



## Slamdunc

Look at this video, another example of a poor trainer adopting the "Bonker" to solve every problem a dog owner could have. Watch the poor dog, Cooper. His body language and what he thinks of his owner and the Bonker. She even says, Cooper is afraid of it!" What a terrible life for that poor dog. The worst thing that dog did was jump on her, it's a buil dog for god's sake, how high can he even jump. Are we to believe that as a dog trainer there were no other options for her to use then smashing the dog in the head with a "Bonker." Look at the cause and effect of the use on the dog. I'm sorry, but I do not want my dog afraid of me or a towel. Notice that comments are disabled for that video. That happened right after I left her some comments. Her response was the usual garbage, "This didn't hurt Cooper and it saves dogs lives. What a bunch of nonsense. Was she really going to euthanize her dog for jumping? Some dog trainer she is. 

I just noticed that she has a prong collar on that dog!!!!! This person should not be training a dog to pee outside, let alone other peoples dogs.  

This stuff really bothers me.


----------



## Steve Strom

Ahhh, its a rolled up towel, and THATS how you do it! I kept folding the darn thing. No wonder my stupid dog still thinks I'll pet him. 6' of separation at all times, awesome!


----------



## Baillif

Doesn't consistently mark her throws. Every time she rares back with that thing cooper wants to hide. Had to disable comments on her video because even by trainers she'd be roasted alive.


----------



## Slamdunc

I made some comments the other day and she replied to me, "yes, Cooper is afraid but it saves dogs." Then she disabled all comments and dislikes.


----------



## GypsyGhost

Oh my. That is a new level of horrible.


----------



## Pytheis

While I do understand interrupting a dog's behavior, which could potentially save its life and give you enough time to grab the leash, shut the door, etc., I don't understand how people would use this as a regular training tool. The dog is afraid. All I see in these dogs is tail tucked, head lowered, cowering in the corner. Those are clear signs of fear and stress. Yes, they will stop the behavior, maybe immediately, because they are afraid. They haven't learned much of anything until you clearly show them what was inappropriate and what they are expected to do instead.

The way the trainer did it to the rescue boxer-looking dog, out of the blue and with no prior communication to the dog that nudging his hand was unacceptable, is just baffling. The dog had literally no idea what he did wrong, and he was afraid it was going to happen again, so he groveled at the trainer's feet. That dog was terrified and learned absolutely nothing. Now the dog will see the trainer as unpredictable and untrustworthy, making proper training that much harder. He may even develop a fear of hands in the future, if this unfair, confusing "training" continues.


----------



## Steve Strom

Slamdunc said:


> I made some comments the other day and she replied to me, "yes, Cooper is afraid but it saves dogs." Then she disabled all comments and dislikes.


Ha, so Cooper made the big sacrifice for the betterment of canine's everywhere! Coop! Coop! Coop! Coop! !!!!!


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Pytheis said:


> The dog had literally no idea what he did wrong, and he was afraid it was going to happen again, so he groveled at the trainer's feet. *That dog was terrified* and learned absolutely nothing.


Or, was calm-submissive according to Cesar Milan. :rolleyes2:


----------



## Slamdunc

Yes, it seems Cooper has taken one for the team. 

If I went to her for dog training and saw that poor dog, scared and cowering, wearing a prong and leash, and trying to get away from her, I'd run. Cooper makes a dash for it when she calls him with his little bulldog legs. She steps on the leash and reels him in. Hmmm, great training right there.


----------



## Heartandsoul

This is so reminiscent of the old fashioned rolled up newspaper. There were a lot of dogs back in my youth who hated the paperboy.

The videos are hard to watch and for a pet household, I would think that the last thing you want to instill n your dog is the fear of what is in your hands. Don't some dogs generalize that to being afraid of ones hand. It seems logical if the techniques is used regularly.


----------



## cdwoodcox

Ego. These guys think they're great trainers. No one is gonna change their minds. And the people who watch these videos and are like "alright sign me up" want a quick fix with as little bother to them as possible. 
Kind of reminds me of a time I took Rosko to his first group training class. He was probably 7-8 months old. The trainer was in the middle of a big circle of all of us owners and dogs. He asked me first thing if Rosko had had any formal training. I said yeah so he went to the next person and asked them. They said just at home so he took their dog with him in the middle of the circle. He went on for 10 minutes about how he was the alpha and because the ladies dog was sitting calmly the dog knew also. But the dog had to also be shown. So he asked the lady to call her dog to her. Now the trainer had the dog on a choke chain and leash. When the lady called her dog back to her he let the dog get about 3 steps and gave a massive leash correction and yelled no. This went on four or five times. I wanted to tell that lady stop calling your fricken dog. Any recall that dog did have is gone. I was so glad he didn't take my dog out there as his demo. I would have flipped out after one time. That is the last time I went to that group. Wasn't even gonna try and get my $75 back. Just distance me and my dog from that fruitcake.


----------



## Heartandsoul

is worth mentioning. As said, there are great methods for teaching a dog not to nuzzle, touch or nibble a hand with food in it. Don't say a word to the dog just have him near you. Put food in hand. Closed hand. Let dog sniff,nuzzle all he wants.dont open hand. As soon as he stops even for a second, open hand and let him take the food. Rinse repeat. I think a vid of this method was posted 5 yrs ago 

my boy understood the concept within 5 mins.. most probably would. Practice off and on for three days and not only did you teach him what not to do but you did it in a way that caused him to think and work the problem out himself which builds confidence. You also are teaching self discipline because once he gets the concept, he waits patiently until the hand is open.

Much better than whacking a dog over the head for inquisitively nudging a hand with food in it.


----------



## Chip18

Baillif said:


> Top monied dog behavioral researchers advocate force free training methods. The top monied dog trainers are using a balanced approach that incorporates positive punishment. Theory vs reality. Researchers get paid to write and publish papers and get grants to do studies. They don't get paid to get results with a dog.
> 
> Not saying anything against science but all too often the money is being thrown at people that tell us what we want to hear or at the very least tell us what can get the most attention.
> 
> I only ever get involved in these threads because the science behind what Gary does is correct, and often the theory gets bashed because the application of it is crap in his case.


Well I do have to say that even I was stunned when I saw him using the Bonker like a freaking club?? When I first created that thread I did not see him doing that???

I specified how I feel it's best used which is to say "again" Door Bolting, Counter Surfing, Yard Escapees and Dog and Cat issues "assuming, the dog is a cat annoyer and not a Cat Killer! And the yard thing labor intensive, but if you don't wanna go or can't afford an E-Collar then you have no choice if you want to stop it now! Beyond that ... I got nothing.


----------



## Slamdunc

@Chip18,
I hope that you now realize what a poor training method this is. I also hope that you realize that internet and youtube trainers that do this have a lot to learn. It is a poor technique even for "Door Bolting, Counter Surfing, Yard Escapees" as you mention. 

People have choices and E collars are not a tool of last resort. You do not need an E collar or a bonker to train a dog. If you think a bonker is an effective tool for those that can't afford an E-collar, well you need to learn more and go to seminars with people that can actually train dogs. 

How it's best used? Is clearly not the way Gary Wilke or Jeff Gellman use it. Expand your horizons and learn from some better people. Those guys are not anyone that I would recommend or endorse.


----------



## voodoolamb

Chip18 said:


> Well I do have to say that even I was stunned when I saw him using the Bonker like a freaking club?? When I first created that thread I did not see him doing that???
> 
> I specified how I feel it's best used which is to say "again" Door Bolting, Counter Surfing, Yard Escapees and Dog and Cat issues "assuming, the dog is a cat annoyer and not a Cat Killer! And the yard thing labor intensive, *but if you don't wanna go or can't afford an E-Collar then you have no choice if you want to stop it now! *Beyond that ... I got nothing.


Well... E collars cost less than some towels these days...

$24.99 e collar
https://www.amazon.com/EtekCollar-T...02069887&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=e+collar&psc=1

$32.50 Bath Towel 
https://www.amazon.com/Turkish-Larg...070174&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=bath+sheet&psc=1

I lost the remote to my dogtra and picked up one of those cheapy e collars just to fool around with it and decide if I wanted to replace the dogtra or not... honestly... the cheapo collar works well... 279 reviews and a 4.4 star rating on amazon... looks like others are happy with the collar as well. Maybe not what I would want for intense field work... but for around the house and yard stuff they work. 

Not to mention the fact that there are MANY MANY other ways to train a dog to stop counter surfing, door bolting, and cat annoying that do not need either an e collar OR a bonker...

Just sayin'


----------



## Heartandsoul

Chip18 said:


> Well I do have to say that even I was stunned when I saw him using the Bonker like a freaking club?? When I first created that thread I did not see him doing that???
> 
> I specified how I feel it's best used which is to say "again" Door Bolting, Counter Surfing, Yard Escapees and Dog and Cat issues "assuming, the dog is a cat annoyer and not a Cat Killer! And the yard thing labor intensive, but if you don't wanna go or can't afford an E-Collar then you have no choice if you want to stop it now! Beyond that ... I got nothing.


Chip, this kind of surprises me as I was under the impression that you have seen at least most of the vids about this. You have posted a lot of links on threads over time and I am pretty sure I have clicked and watched every single one at least once to help me learn. A lot of them I did get useful info that I used to help me and my boy. Some of them I tweeked the method to fit my dog a few I didn't use but learned something from.

I think the most important thing to remember is that as a newbie clicking on links supported by the one who linked it, what most remember is what is on the video. What the person who offered the link says afterwards may or may not sink in.


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> @Chip18,
> I hope that you now realize what a poor training method this is. I also hope that you realize that internet and youtube trainers that do this have a lot to learn.


 My argument ... is not about me and what I do and recommend??? Bubble Dog and Zero Bite Risk Policy is how I train a dog. And to be fair I stole the term "Bubble Dog" (a dog that needs to be muzzled for a time to be safe out in public) from another member who felt that our dogs should be kept away from the public. It was used as a "Slam" (no pun intended) but I liked it. 




Slamdunc said:


> [MENTION=218194]
> It is a poor technique even for "Door Bolting, Counter Surfing, Yard Escapees" as you mention.


Agree to disagree???? 



Slamdunc said:


> [MENTION=218194]
> People have choices and* E collars are not a tool of last resort.* You do not need an E collar or a bonker to train a dog. If you think a bonker is an effective tool for those that can't afford an E-collar, well you need to learn more and go to seminars with people that can actually train dogs.
> 
> How it's best used? Is clearly not the way Gary Wilke or Jeff Gellman use it. Expand your horizons and learn from some better people. Those guys are not anyone that I would recommend or endorse.


I've never said the part in bold??? Apparently people like to "infer that." I have said I'm a SLL "only guy" because of what I do. And I have said that if I get a "Deaf Boxer" I will have no choice but to use an "E-Collar." Because that is the only way I could them safe. 

I don't like the hassle of having to grab an E-Collar, the Remote and then my dog. I'm kinda lazy and don't want to change what I do unless "forced to by circumstances!" 

Well you know actually ... "Punished by failure on my part" for being uh "Stupid???" Hence and yeah I was kinda "toolish" but your Flashlight advise in my "Dog Attack Thread!" 

So yes ... I was kinda "toolish at first" but you know ... I've never seen anyone that gave kinda "advise as to why and how???" Cause ... you know ... people can't see in the dark ... who knew. :

At anyrate ... your flash advise gets seen by others every time anyone views or links to that thread ... so despite the prevailing perception ... I do learn from others. 

At anyrate as time on goes sigh despite my intentions I've now added a "Walking Stick and a FlashLight." To midnight walks so I suppose if I get a Boxer then an E-Collar and the remote it is. 

At any rate I've never said tools of last resort ... I have said thus far I have not found the need.


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> I made some comments the other day and she replied to me, "yes, Cooper is afraid but it saves dogs." Then she disabled all comments and dislikes.







,
Tylor Muto ... also has comments disabled some trainers do some traines don't, funny enough I get why "comments are disabled by some." 

And yeah he lots of other stuff which I have posted but I like Shelly.


----------



## Chip18

voodoolamb said:


> Well... E collars cost less than some towels these days...
> 
> $24.99 e collar
> https://www.amazon.com/EtekCollar-T...02069887&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=e+collar&psc=1
> 
> $32.50 Bath Towel
> https://www.amazon.com/Turkish-Larg...070174&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=bath+sheet&psc=1
> 
> I lost the remote to my dogtra and picked up one of those cheapy e collars just to fool around with it and decide if I wanted to replace the dogtra or not... honestly... the cheapo collar works well... 279 reviews and a 4.4 star rating on amazon... looks like others are happy with the collar as well. Maybe not what I would want for intense field work... but for around the house and yard stuff they work.
> 
> Not to mention the fact that there are MANY MANY other ways to train a dog to stop counter surfing, door bolting, and cat annoying that do not need either an e collar OR a bonker...
> 
> Just sayin'


People that can't train a dog and have a behaviour that they want to stop now are not willing to spend anything. List the Dog on Craigslist charge a rehoming fee, and problem solved. And they make money in the process, there not looking for "Many,Many" solutions ... they don't care. 

But you can't ask them because by and large they don't do stuff like this.


----------



## Baillif

Some truth to that. I usually don't bother giving any kind of training advice to anyone, even when they ask for it, unless I am being paid for that information. It is a waste of time. People do not value advice unless they have to pay for it. If you want a well trained dog pass it over I'll train it and then train you to handle it. Expecting the person who created a problem with a dog to fix it is pretty silly. Not saying that it can't happen but it doesn't happen often.


----------



## Chip18

Heartandsoul said:


> Chip, this kind of surprises me as I was under the impression that you have seen at least most of the vids about this. You have posted a lot of links on threads over time and I am pretty sure I have clicked and watched every single one at least once to help me learn. A lot of them I did get useful info that I used to help me and my boy. Some of them I tweeked the method to fit my dog a few I didn't use but learned something from.
> 
> I think the most important thing to remember is that as a newbie clicking on links supported by the one who linked it, what most remember is what is on the video. What the person who offered the link says afterwards may or may not sink in.


Oh fair enough ... I pretty much post for "that Guy/Girl."

I know they are out there because I hear from them. And from people that get "me" I've heard "Thank You For Being Different" and online on Boxerforeum I got a thank you for being "Anal." 

And over there I got challenged by a Pro (I had no idea any were there) they should have self identified, it would have gone better for them but that's another story. But it worked out well in the long run like uh a year of effort to get them back ...uh may bad. : 


But in one of my numerous "Lectures/Tirades/Rants they asked me "Why I Bothered" ... annoyed by them yet again ... I said "if I can help one dog and one owner keep their dog in there home," it's worth my time! I "work" for that "guy/girl." I don't do kids, I don't do other dogs and I have "zero interest in my dog who did not much care for people ... meeting anyone. Zero Bite Risk policy, they just have to be safe and civil no requirement to like uh anyone, it's what I did with my dogs, it's what I do with rescues ... works out fine. 

But you know ... you don't often hear from "lukers" but I do ... quite often. They see what "I" go through and they don't want to get involved. Much like Rocky ... you lead I'll follow good enough.  

But if you *"tweaked" *some of the links/advise ... good enough! That's what I do/did with Rocky and his people issues! I did basically what I always did anyway with Struddell. Make them wait (my dogs) before greeting people. I did not realize at the time I was doing Leerburghs "Who Pets My Puppy or Dog" because I always said yes to "my I pet??" But I read Leerburgh ... many years ago and at first read it seemed kinda uh insane??? But you know ... what if instead of always saying "Yes" to my I pet ... I said "No???" It worked out fine and the rest is history.

So if you tweaked some of the advice ... "outstanding!" That is pretty much what I did and I have learned other things on here ... despite what some chose to believe and I share that with others. 
And if folks that PM me have questions and it is a question, I can't really answer or feel uncomfortable doing so ... I hand them off to some on here and tell them add "Chip" sent you. 

Other than that I also add that by and large aside from Gary ... all the trainers I tend to recommend do weekly Q&A, shows so if someone is not sure ... they can ask those guys directly! And they all have FaceBook pages for questions. But know by and large I'm pretty good at saying what they will tell folks.


----------



## cliffson1

When giving advice, I am ever cognizant of whether the advice will be misused or misconstrued by less knowledgeable or skillful people. I don't recommend ecollars in most situations, though I have used one and gone to class to use it correctly. Why? Because it is a tool that requires hands on instructions for 90% of newbies. I put bonkers in same category...


----------



## Heartandsoul

@Chip, what I was trying to get at is the same as what has been pointed out 

and I'm saying this bluntly now.It took thirteen pages of discussion about why the bonker is not a good method before you realized that GW was whacking a dog over the head and promoting it as a good way to train a dog and your response to it was quite flat for someone who links these vids often.

I just assumed that even though you don't use the method that you have promoted, you took the time to research it more before promoting it. Just would think that you would have watched the first vid on this thread because you do promote the method.


----------



## Tennessee

LuvShepherds said:


> It is not necessary to be rude to someone. If you don't like their post, give better information. Why do people think it's alright to bash others on a forum? Would they do the same in real life? Read Slam's reply to the same person. It was thoughtful and respectful, even if he did not agree.


Do I really need to? Provide better information that is, to someone who can't figure out why random violence isn't a good training or leadership method? He needs a government white paper on bonkers apparently to come to that realization, what words could I possibly say that would sway him. Nevermind the fact that no training or leadership manual of any merit would advocate that, for dogs, humans, horses, any animal. 

Would I say that in real life equally as bitingly sarcastically, yes I would. All ideas and scepticism are not equally deserving of merit or respect. 

At its core GW's method is fear based compliance, will it work to an extent, the answer is of course on the right animal Yes. Is it a healthy method that builds trust, respect, loyalty, and love and has long term broad spectrum applications? the answer of course is a resounding No!

Training a dog is best analogous to the military a form of benevolent dictatorship. I am the officer or noncom, the dog is the private. I am in total control and the dog must follow what I say or suffer the consequences. In the beginning of training all freedom is restricted and the trainee is shown the rules he must live by. These commands are repeated until the trainee can be trusted to follow them, then he is given a measure of independence. The training continues as the scenarios are made increasingly more difficult whereby the trainee learns to use the foundational skill set to make the proper choices in different environments and scenarios. Along the way rewards are given for getting things right, punishments are given for getting things wrong. Cause and effect, carrot and stick metered out fairly. 

This bonds the trainee to his trainer as it shows the trainer to be the Alpha, the person most capable of leading. There are bonds of trust, respect, admiration, and love established within a context of consistent rules. There is order to life, there are rules, there is fun, all of this provides a liberating freedom from decision making. 

I do abc, I don't do xyz, and good things happen. I trust my leadership to take care of the rest, simple and straightforward. No random violence necessary, with a rolled up towel or otherwise.


----------



## LuvShepherds

Tennessee said:


> Do I really need to? Provide better information that is, to someone who can't figure out why random violence isn't a good training or leadership method? He needs a government white paper on bonkers apparently to come to that realization, what words could I possibly say that would sway him. Nevermind the fact that no training or leadership manual of any merit would advocate that, for dogs, humans, horses, any animal.
> 
> Would I say that in real life equally as bitingly sarcastically, yes I would. All ideas and scepticism are not equally deserving of merit or respect.
> 
> At its core GW's method is fear based compliance, will it work to an extent, the answer is of course on the right animal Yes. Is it a healthy method that builds trust, respect, loyalty, and love and has long term broad spectrum applications? the answer of course is a resounding No!
> 
> Training a dog is best analogous to the military a form of benevolent dictatorship. I am the officer or noncom, the dog is the private. I am in total control and the dog must follow what I say or suffer the consequences. In the beginning of training all freedom is restricted and the trainee is shown the rules he must live by. These commands are repeated until the trainee can be trusted to follow them, then he is given a measure of independence. The training continues as the scenarios are made increasingly more difficult whereby the trainee learns to use the foundational skill set to make the proper choices in different environments and scenarios. Along the way rewards are given for getting things right, punishments are given for getting things wrong. Cause and effect, carrot and stick metered out fairly.
> 
> This bonds the trainee to his trainer as it shows the trainer to be the Alpha, the person most capable of leading. There are bonds of trust, respect, admiration, and love established within a context of consistent rules. There is order to life, there are rules, there is fun, all of this provides a liberating freedom from decision making.
> 
> I do abc, I don't do xyz, and good things happen. I trust my leadership to take care of the rest, simple and straightforward. No random violence necessary, with a rolled up towel or otherwise.


Yes, you do and you did. It's not for him, it is for all the other people who read his advice and think it is a good idea. I have a mixed reaction to GW. I disagree with what he says about bonkers but he occasionally has good ideas, and he did create a whole system of training that works for some people with some breeds.


----------



## Slamdunc

cliffson1 said:


> When giving advice, I am ever cognizant of whether the advice will be misused or misconstrued by less knowledgeable or skillful people. I don't recommend ecollars in most situations, though I have used one and gone to class to use it correctly. Why? Because it is a tool that requires hands on instructions for 90% of newbies. I put bonkers in same category...


This is an excellent point! Cliff is a very knowledgeable handler and trainer. He certainly realizes that what may work for one person or dog could be bad for another. It is really hard to give advice at times, because even really good advice can be misunderstood or misused by others. 

The old saying " a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing" applies perfectly to this thread. Folks with limited experience giving advice and not realizing the entire impact or ramifications of that advice.


----------



## LuvShepherds

cliffson1 said:


> When giving advice, I am ever cognizant of whether the advice will be misused or misconstrued by less knowledgeable or skillful people. I don't recommend ecollars in most situations, though I have used one and gone to class to use it correctly. Why? Because it is a tool that requires hands on instructions for 90% of newbies. I put bonkers in same category...


I understand and agree, but why can't a newbie get hands on instruction from a trainer in real time?


----------



## cliffson1

LuvShepherds said:


> I understand and agree, but why can't a newbie get hands on instruction from a trainer in real time?


I newbie CAN get hands on in real time, but the majority of really knowledgeable trainers are going to take another approach in handling problem situations....I know because I get paid handsomely to problem solve for owners and I would never use this method as a first result or quite frankly communicate this approach to folks. One, there are too many other approaches, two, people are very funny about even the " perception " of harming their pets.


----------



## Chip18

Heartandsoul said:


> @Chip, what I was trying to get at is the same as what has been pointed out
> 
> and I'm saying this bluntly now.It took thirteen pages of discussion about why the bonker is not a good method before you realized that GW was whacking a dog over the head and promoting it as a good way to train a dog and your response to it was quite flat for someone who links these videos often.
> 
> I just assumed that even though you don't use the method that you have promoted, you took the time to research it more before promoting it. Just would think that you would have watched the first vid on this thread because you do promote the method.


Well that's fair ... and since you said "me" and actually near as I can tell asked about "why" or why not, I'll explain. No I have not seen all of his clips ... I read his book online all 400 some odd pages a few years ago. Looks like he has been busy since then?? But behaviours that need to be stopped now (I chose to add life threatening ot it!) What he's done since then ... I have no control of ... not my job to tell him what to do. All I cared about was behaviours that need to stop now! Or one won't have a dog to train and I would imagine that getting hit by a car would hurt a lot more then getting hit by a towel????

Despite what some chose to believe ... there are dog owners who don't walk there dogs, don't exercise their dog and don't train them! I know they "exist" because I have talked to them and and I have tried to help them in "ReaL Life" but thus far no takers. They live in despair and desperation because they feel there is no hope! They don't believe there is anything that can be done. And telling them they are "stupid" and should not have a dog while yes is true ... it's not to helpful?? 

Nears as can I tell "Bonking was not a traing method at the time?? Pretty sure that info is linked in my thread "also." I only advocate it for "Door Bolting, Cat Chasing, Counter Surfing and although, you know labor intensive because you gotta be there Yard Escapes! And you correct those behaviours by "punishing those behaviours hard fast and now!" If as I have said they can stop one bad behaviour them maybe those owners will keep their dog????

And in the real world, I have returned Door Bolters, I have helped find a yard escapee a new home (fortunately for Molly, I chose not to correct her for escaping her yard and persistently coming into mine. The owner could not stop her and I remained "Bonker" silent and took her in. And for people that ask as regards Bonkers and Cat's, I advise them that there is a distinction between Cat Annoyers and Cat Killers. 

In the real world I have heard stories of owners with dogs they can't handle and don't understand and those owners are sad disillusion and heartbroken! And one of them I met did try and find a trainer with a "Breed That shall not be mentioned." In an on leash only Dog Park, I saw him in the distance. The dog was on a long line Pulling away and the guys was keeping, clearly clear of others and there dogs?? I was with Rocky and I of course put Rocky back in the car and then approached the pair. Sigh... but of course serous ... "DA!" And yep he tried to find a trainer ... most likely some PO, click and treat tool??? I don't know if that "Trainer" used his dog as or a client's dogs as a test subject ... but it did not work out that well! The dog mauled another dog under a trainer's unhelpful glaze. So I suppose find the right trainer would have been better advise. But I heard the long sad story and the guys was heartbroken. His dog was now worst, he poured money down a rat hole and most likely he now feels all trainers are crap! 

I with my limited experience with my handful of dogs ... could have helped, and no dogs would have been put at risk. He couldn't walk the dog properly at all and uh ... why are you here now, with this dog in a semi dog park exactly??? But that's not what I said ... as a lecture on what a screw up he was, would not have been helpful. And no at that time neither would a "Bonker," not the appropriate tool or technique for that dog at that time ... if ever?? I gave him my email and my phone number ... but you know I never heard from him. And another PCA, co worker of sorts with a Midnight walker only Shar Pei. That dog was even worst or the owner was even more terrified??? As that dog only came out at midnight! And again the owner had no hope, and no again not a Bonker Dog.

I did not advise the "Bonker as a Trainer Philosophy" others chose to claim I did. I merely take what works and leave the rest. I "assume" others are capable of doing so also??? 

Oh well long post but to answer your question directly ... no I have not used the "Bonker directly as such. But I did use the concept behind it ... as it happens but I got there like this. :

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/5120529-post48.html

And in practice it worked like this.:
Teach your Dog to ignore other dogs.  - Boxer Forum : Boxer Breed Dog Forums

So you know not exactly a "Bonker" but I suppose I could have carried a towel and used that as well??? As really it's the same concept??? But you know SLL guy so it never occurred to me to use it like that, but whatever worked out fine and I only needed to do that "Once!"


----------



## Heartandsoul

Oh well long post but to answer your question directly ... no I have not used the "Bonker directly as such. But I did use the concept behind it ... as it happens but I got there like this. :

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/5120529-post48.html

And in practice it worked like this.:
Teach your Dog to ignore other dogs.  - Boxer Forum : Boxer Breed Dog Forums

So you know not exactly a "Bonker" but I suppose I could have carried a towel and used that as well??? As really it's the same concept??? But you know SLL guy so it never occurred to me to use it like that, but whatever worked out fine and I only needed to do that "Once!"[/QUOTE]

No it is not the same concept. The 8 pg thread that you reference is about aggressive loose dog attacks and what can be done to stop it. A far cry from door bolting,counter surfing . I took the time to skim all 8 pg. David Winners is an experienced dog handler whose journey started when he was deployed and became part of the unit for bomb sniffing dogs (the acronyms for this escape me right now).

I actually appreciate that you cited how and where your promotion of the bonker stems from but it just leaves me shaking my head. It also is a good example of what Cliffson and Slamdunc said about being careful of offering advice with specific techniques for very specific situation.

I had more to type but it all become blah blah blah at this point.

I am going to say this for newbies watching this thread, and I feel confident to say it as I am that jqp didn't know squat, 1st gsd who was a counter surfer, potential door dasher liability, dog reactive dog, who has needed and I have given hard/fair and unfair (my error) corrections to, Before you start whacking your dog or any other hard correction that can back lash at you, take the time to lay the foundation of trust and bonding first. Take the time to show the dog what you want. Take the time to learn his/her body signals. Just take the time. 

I really hope that these good trainers on here, those who are active in this thread and those who are just watching keep offering advice and help. I would not have understood my dog 1/2 as well, learned to handled him half as fairly, kept me motivated and at wanting to learn more had it not been for all those threads you, as trainers, have replied to as I was lurking. I'm sure there are hundreds, maybe thousands (as indicated in the "viewed" count) just like me.

I'm a bit heated because I just keep seeing that first vid of the dog who was so eager to engage and ended up creeping, tail cemented between legs into the lap as the result of being bonked.


----------



## Baillif

Slamdunc said:


> This is an excellent point! Cliff is a very knowledgeable handler and trainer. He certainly realizes that what may work for one person or dog could be bad for another. It is really hard to give advice at times, because even really good advice can be misunderstood or misused by others.
> 
> The old saying " a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing" applies perfectly to this thread. Folks with limited experience giving advice and not realizing the entire impact or ramifications of that advice.


I like to use the phrase, "Giving them just enough rope to hang themselves." A little bit of knowledge without the necessary experience and context behind it is doing just that.


----------



## Chip18

Heartandsoul said:


> @Chip, what I was trying to get at is the same as what has been pointed out
> 
> and I'm saying this bluntly now.It took thirteen pages of discussion about why the bonker is not a good method before you realized that GW was whacking a dog over the head and promoting it as a good way to train a dog and your response to it was quite flat for someone who links these vids often.
> 
> I just assumed that even though you don't use the method that you have promoted, you took the time to research it more before promoting it. Just would think that you would have watched the first vid on this thread because you do promote the method.


Oh well, had you PM'ed me there would have been no need to read through thirteen pages, by default you would be engaged with your dog and thus by "default" you have had a concept of training, and  engagement and Bond of Trust (did a thread on that one also, a few years ago, ... no one cares. 

I'd have advised "Out think Your Dog" and near as I know though with knowledge do that no one aside from me ... Say's it?? But you know I don't hang out with dog people ... so I don't know??
I would have added "Walk Your dog"Train Place and try "Threshold Training??" 

I share my mistakes so others can learn from them. So if well I won't do that, works also for some good enough! I have done quite a few things that "some" tell me won't work or can't be done! No dogs "touched" no dogs "harmed" so you know OK then. 


You found something online through my advise and it sounded odd to you??? So you dug into it deeper and "thought it out" and felt well it's not for me???" Fine, outstanding in fact, I got no use for "lemmings." I am the "Cat Herder." 

I suppose if you're gonna breathe fire and spit bullets ... you gotta expect some heat??? I did not really "expect" to face well, constant "Strawman" arguments" you know Bonker uses, I did advocate. But no problem ... If I am so influential and so pervasive that "Pro's" fear I will be having "EVERYONE FOR WHATEVER REASON Bonking their dog ??? " which ... is not what I said, ??? NO problem, I will amend my "Bonker Thread and include this one. I gots no problem with that ... thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## Heartandsoul

I assure you that you are not speaking to a lemming. As far as heat, the taking and giving of it is not an issue. Though anger as a side dish serves no purpose. I'm sure that you are aware that typing in capitol letters is the same as shouting in type written form of communication, at least it use to be way back when I was younger. So on that premise, please do not shout. As for the pros, I can't nor would I speak for them.

and you are welcome.


----------



## Slamdunc

@Chip,
Again, here is the problem, you have been advocating and posting videos to a terrible training technique for at least 2 years. What is even more troubling is that you claim you have never used the technique or have any experience with it. Promoting a technique that involves smashing a dog over the head is bad enough, what makes it worse is the lack of experience or understanding of that technique. These are not "straw man arguments." There are over 200 posts that reference the "Bonker" and the vast majority are by you. The others are from people responding to you. This is not a "straw man argument." The people that are upset with this method understand training, compulsion and the effects of these techniques. Improperly used corrections or compulsion cause avoidance. That is what you see in these "Bonker" videos by that joke of a trainer Gary Wilke. That is what caused me to respond to this thread. 

I'm going to post one of the videos that you posted back in 2015. People can decide if "bonking" is a method of dog training that they want to use. I will never use it, it is horrible to see Gary Wilke do this to poor dogs. Then he baby talks the dogs like a complete moron.






Back in December of 2015 you described the "Bonker as your personal favorite and posted a link to another Wilke video on "how to Bonk." 

I think enough light has been shed on the "Bonker" and it's poor choice as a training technique. It is pretty clear for everyone to see. Please do not recommend techniques that you _have never used_ or lack a very thorough understanding of.


----------



## thegooseman90

Ha his own dog doesn't wanna come near him. No wonder why because he's used to getting whacked in the head with that squeaky toy or whatever it was any time he gets close. The dog seems soft and cowardly and shouldn't be hit with anything. Can't imagine this working with a hard dog, or just imagine a reactive one. I would love to see a video of that with this guy actually.


----------



## Slamdunc

thegooseman90 said:


> Ha his own dog doesn't wanna come near him. No wonder why because he's used to *getting whacked in the head with that squeaky toy or whatever it was *any time he gets close. The dog seems soft and cowardly and shouldn't be hit with anything. Can't imagine this working with a hard dog, or just imagine a reactive one. I would love to see a video of that with this guy actually.


The dog is actually a nice young GSD pup. The dog isn't cowardly, he is a puppy and was just smashed in the head for a behavior that Wilke rewarded, praised and enforced moments ago. That was the dog yelping from being hit with a rolled up towel. What Wilke used was a rolled up towel to hit the dog in the head, not a squeaky toy. The noise you heard was the dog yelping. 

You are correct that the dog doesn't deserve to be hit with anything. I'd like to see him do it with a tougher dog as well. That will never happen, I'm sure this guy picks his victims very carefully. I'm amazed the owners of these dogs allow this.


----------



## Chip18

Heartandsoul said:


> I assure you that you are not speaking to a lemming. As far as heat, the taking and giving of it is not an issue. Though anger as a side dish serves no purpose. I'm sure that you are aware that typing in capitol letters is the same as shouting in type written form of communication, at least it use to be way back when I was younger. So on that premise, please do not shout. As for the pros, I can't nor would I speak for them.
> 
> and you are welcome.


It was not my intent to imply that "you" were a lemming, nor were the caps about you and if I offended you ... I sincerely apologize, my bad.


----------



## Heartandsoul

Chip, thank you. It's a gorgeous day so onward and upward with my boy.


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

Slamdunc said:


> @Chip,
> Again, here is the problem, you have been advocating and posting videos to a terrible training technique for at least 2 years. What is even more troubling is that you claim you have never used the technique or have any experience with it. Promoting a technique that involves smashing a dog over the head is bad enough, what makes it worse is the lack of experience or understanding of that technique. These are not "straw man arguments." There are over 200 posts that reference the "Bonker" and the vast majority are by you. The others are from people responding to you. This is not a "straw man argument." The people that are upset with this method understand training, compulsion and the effects of these techniques. Improperly used corrections or compulsion cause avoidance. That is what you see in these "Bonker" videos by that joke of a trainer Gary Wilke. That is what caused me to respond to this thread.
> 
> I'm going to post one of the videos that you posted back in 2015. People can decide if "bonking" is a method of dog training that they want to use. I will never use it, it is horrible to see Gary Wilke do this to poor dogs. Then he baby talks the dogs like a complete moron.
> 
> https://youtu.be/03sqhnltvTc
> 
> Back in December of 2015 you described the "Bonker as your personal favorite and posted a link to another Wilke video on "how to Bonk."
> 
> I think enough light has been shed on the "Bonker" and it's poor choice as a training technique. It is pretty clear for everyone to see. Please do not recommend techniques that you _have never used_ or lack a very thorough understanding of.


This is just incredibly sad and stupid. I have been hearing about this guy for years, and I see seminars posted for him all the time. It boggles my mind that in this day in age and the knowledge out there, that people would still pay money to go to a seminar with someone who treats dogs like this. You can tell the dog doesn't trust him at all, he thinks it's a trick and he is going to get hit again. Like I said about Jeff Gellman, if you're gonna do it then own it---"bonking" has a somewhat moe jovial connotation. It's hitting. And the worst kind, because it is coming with mixed signals, no ability to avoid or make a better choice


----------



## Chip18

Slamdunc said:


> I'm going to post one of the videos that you posted back in 2015. People can decide if "bonking" is a method of dog training that they want to use. I will never use it, it is horrible to see Gary Wilke do this to poor dogs. Then he baby talks the dogs like a complete moron.
> 
> https://youtu.be/03sqhnltvTc
> 
> Back in December of 2015 you described the "Bonker as your personal favorite and posted a link to another Wilke video on "how to Bonk."


Yes ... yes I did. 




Slamdunc said:


> I think enough light has been shed on the "Bonker" and it's poor choice as a training technique. It is pretty clear for everyone to see. Please do not recommend techniques that you _have never used_ or lack a very thorough understanding of.


Well I don't have any first hand experience of what's it like to have my dog Bite a stranger either??? 

But in light of a lesson learned for me here, from Selzer, "take 24 hours to think before responding??" And in light of yet another "Chip Specific" dictum ... and not really being sure if it's a request or a demand??? But as it's not fun being a muzzled dog in a Dog Park, I'll, "Stand Down ... here.:










Uh oh ... the incite to riot clause ... did I violate that one ... now??? :frown2:


----------



## thegooseman90

Slamdunc said:


> thegooseman90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ha his own dog doesn't wanna come near him. No wonder why because he's used to *getting whacked in the head with that squeaky toy or whatever it was *any time he gets close. The dog seems soft and cowardly and shouldn't be hit with anything. Can't imagine this working with a hard dog, or just imagine a reactive one. I would love to see a video of that with this guy actually.
> 
> 
> 
> The dog is actually a nice young GSD pup. The dog isn't cowardly, he is a puppy and was just smashed in the head for a behavior that Wilke rewarded, praised and enforced moments ago. That was the dog yelping from being hit with a rolled up towel. What Wilke used was a rolled up towel to hit the dog in the head, not a squeaky toy. The noise you heard was the dog yelping.
> 
> You are correct that the dog doesn't deserve to be hit with anything. I'd like to see him do it with a tougher dog as well. That will never happen, I'm sure this guy picks his victims very carefully. I'm amazed the owners of these dogs allow this.
Click to expand...

 I stand corrected then. I thought it was a young adult cowering but if it's a pup it's understandable. 

Anyhow maybe we can get Gary and chip to collab and do a bonker training seminar. I know someone on this thread must have the perfect dog for them to try it on haha


----------



## Tennessee

thegooseman90 said:


> I stand corrected then. I thought it was a young adult cowering but if it's a pup it's understandable.
> 
> Anyhow maybe we can get Gary and chip to collab and do a bonker training seminar. I know someone on this thread must have the perfect dog for them to try it on haha


I don't think crippling for life or killing the guy is the most mature response. >


----------



## Muskeg

I think a lot of decent dogs would be pretty upset when a person who was patting them when they went out the door slammed them with a towel and yelled "no!". Even a stronger dog, unless trained. Some just wouldn't take it, but most would run and hide. Pretty normal behavior for an animal that strives to make people happy. And failed, and can't figure out why, and got punished for it, to boot. 

Also- do you think the bonk made him not a door rusher, or just afraid of sly strangers? 

Anyway, I think we can all agree - even without a white paper - that the "bonk" technique displayed in these Wilkes videos is poorly applied, at best. Which is partly why, I think, few trainers will demonstrate positive punishment on video.


----------



## Baillif

Thecowboysgirl said:


> It's hitting. And the worst kind, because it is coming with mixed signals, no ability to avoid or make a better choice


The signals in the moment are not mixed. When the dog is in the wrong the signal is pretty clear. When the dog is no longer in the wrong that signal is pretty clear too. The dog has the ability to avoid or make a better choice. It simply has to avoid the target behavior. The dogs in those videos find a functional alternative to engaging in the target behavior. It is simply not tactfully done. If someone consistently punished a dog for the target behavior in that way you can bet the incidence of the behavior would drop to very low levels and so would the accompanying stress of correction. 

The worst kind of "hitting" is inconsistent and unpredictable. As long as the bonking method isn't done like that then the only real fault I have with it is procedurally there is a more tactful way it can be done. Arguably this can nearly always be said of any method that involves corrections. 

If you wanted to take a car apart you could do so with a screw driver or you could do so with a bomb. If you do it with a bomb the car will come apart quicker although there will be pieces to fix or salvage afterwards and a mess to clean up. If you do so with a screw driver it might take a while but there is less cleanup involved after. Dog training with corrections is pretty much just like this. This method is obviously more bomb like than most of you find palatable, and for the things it was used for in the videos we saw I would agree with the people who feel that way, but IMO there are times when I believe a more bomb like approach is warranted and desirable. Aggression vs dogs or handlers are one of those times, things that could potentially lead to the death of the dog may apply as well.


----------



## cliffson1

Baillif said:


> The signals in the moment are not mixed. When the dog is in the wrong the signal is pretty clear. When the dog is no longer in the wrong that signal is pretty clear too. The dog has the ability to avoid or make a better choice. It simply has to avoid the target behavior. The dogs in those videos find a functional alternative to engaging in the target behavior. It is simply not tactfully done. If someone consistently punished a dog for the target behavior in that way you can bet the incidence of the behavior would drop to very low levels and so would the accompanying stress of correction.
> 
> The worst kind of "hitting" is inconsistent and unpredictable. As long as the bonking method isn't done like that then the only real fault I have with it is procedurally there is a more tactful way it can be done. Arguably this can nearly always be said of any method that involves corrections.
> 
> If you wanted to take a car apart you could do so with a screw driver or you could do so with a bomb. If you do it with a bomb the car will come apart quicker although there will be pieces to fix or salvage afterwards and a mess to clean up. If you do so with a screw driver it might take a while but there is less cleanup involved after. Dog training with corrections is pretty much just like this. This method is obviously more bomb like than most of you find palatable, and for the things it was used for in the videos we saw I would agree with the people who feel that way, but IMO there are times when I believe a more bomb like approach is warranted and desirable. Aggression vs dogs or handlers are one of those times, things that could potentially lead to the death of the dog may apply as well.


Bailiff....I don't disagree with what you wrote at all, the problem is that most pet folks( and some trainers) are ill equipped to use this method correctly AND for the very few incidents that necessitate the use. Therefore, I would never recommend using it, the people skilled enough don't need a recommendation, if you are not skilled the odds of other damages are great. Basically, it's a shortcut method, ( and I use shortcuts in some instance,especially to eliminate as opposed to build) that requires excellent judgement and execution to have merit, so I would not recommend it to others.


----------



## Baillif

There are a few things about the method aside from the lack of tact that I don't like. 

The biggest one I am seeing in the video is that the dogs are afraid of the actual bonk towel. It is not desirable IMO to have a dog afraid of the tool of correction. I use a heeling stick sometimes. I correct my dogs with it and when the no marker is given they show an aversion to it if that is going to be the vehicle of correction. In the absence of that no marker that same stick doesn't bother the dogs in the least even if I swing it around in the air or even go so far as to fake a swing at their heads. My processes are clean enough to where the dogs know it isn't going to be used for correction unless it is marked. Having a dog cower just because you are carrying around a rolled up towel is bull****. Being proud of it is even more bull****. It shows a marked lack of clarity.

The bonk simply holds no advantage to an e collar or a leash aside from maybe cost and probably not even that as I have seen some super cheap leashes. It is a gimmick.


----------



## Heartandsoul

is the heeling stick also used for things that the dog views as fun and looks forward to doing?I know with the prong and the e collar, these are used for corrections but also for the fun stuff. Wouldn't that play a big part in why the dog is not afraid of the item? I'm grasping most of what was said but wondering about this one question.


----------



## Steve Strom

The verbal marker tells them its coming. No verbal marker=you're not getting the physical part. The collar or stick aren't the point, its the conditioning to the marker. Its one of the easier ways to avoid being dependent on any certain collar or towel.


----------



## Slamdunc

The biggest problem that I see with the use of the "Bonker" by Gary Wilkes is how he uses it and how he sets the dog up. It is unfair to call a young dog or puppy out of the front door. praise and baby talk it (which is really annoying by itself), then allow the dog to come to the door and smash it over the head. The dog had no idea what happened and that is not an effective correction, the dog ran and laid in it's bed and cowered. He does the same thing in his seminar, annoyingly baby talks a dog, shows it a treat and when the dog investigates there treat, smashes it over the head. What Wilke does can not be compared to a trainer working a dog with a heeling stick. I would assume a trainer working with a heeling stick doesn't go out day one with a puppy and crack it over the head with the heeling stick repeatedly. I would think the dog would have the basic understanding of what "heel" means before going to a stick. 

I'm not against Heeling sticks or corrections, I am against correcting a dog so harshly that it gets the reaction these dogs have, for a behavior it doesn't know or understand. That is abusive and what Wilke did was abusive and there are far better ways to train dogs to not counter surf or bolt out of a door. It's funny these idiotic "bonker" trainers want to use it for everything and every behavior. I view them as lazy and incompetent dog trainers.


----------



## Steve Strom

I think specific to the heeling stick, its best as just an annoyance the dog try's to avoid when they're heeling. Not exactly what you'd think of for a real physical correction. Bugs them just enough to keep them back a little, or head up a little.


----------



## Heartandsoul

So the heeling stick is associated with something fun, out side and active engagement with his/her handler. Same with the prong and e collar. In one of the bonker vids I believe the trainer said never to allow the dog to play with the bonker. 

Steve, I understand what your saying about the marker word and all, I just am not grasping how a dog can learn not to fear a correction tool without some kind of positive experience associated with it also. Or maybe it is the human who is using the tool that the dog has to have positive experiences with, thus able to say it's not the tool but the marker word.

I'm not being belligerent, it is just how I process and think things through when I don't fully understand. Though with this all, It is very evident just how complex it is. At least to me and the level I'm at.


----------



## Steve Strom

Some dogs, maybe they can't. That's always what you have to consider, how the dog perceives it. A lot of things sound good, and then they don't work. Sometimes maybe you want that association of uh oh, as soon as you pull out a collar or something. Things are fluid and subject to change.


----------



## Baillif

Steve Strom said:


> I think specific to the heeling stick, its best as just an annoyance the dog try's to avoid when they're heeling. Not exactly what you'd think of for a real physical correction. Bugs them just enough to keep them back a little, or head up a little.


At first sure but once they are really familiar with position and requirements of the behavior I give em a pretty good wack with it when they screw up.

I think it is ok to bait a dog if you never want the behavior in question under any circumstances from then on out as long as you are consistent. Baiting a counter surfer with food on the counter isn't really any different from patting your lap to bait a jumper or cooing a dog into breaking a down if that isn't his release.


----------



## cloudpump

voodoolamb said:


> I attempted to use the "Bonker" technique on my dog tonight. As described by Gary Wilkes and promoted by others...
> 
> My dog was being a jerk and nosing the AC vent. He ignored my "leave it" command so out came the trusty bonker. I tossed it at him. It bounced off his head and he turned and looked at me like huh? Then went back to making out with the AC vent for a few moments, afterwards he picked up the bonker and brought it to me trying to play.
> 
> Is that how it is supposed to work?


The bonker failed me tonight. They started to tear it up. Had to take it away.


----------



## voodoolamb

cloudpump said:


> The bonker failed me tonight. They started to tear it up. Had to take it away.


Your dogs, too, are defective I see.


----------



## Shefali

Baillif said:


> Top monied dog behavioral researchers advocate force free training methods. The top monied dog trainers are using a balanced approach that incorporates positive punishment. Theory vs reality. Researchers get paid to write and publish papers and get grants to do studies. They don't get paid to get results with a dog.
> 
> Not saying anything against science but all too often the money is being thrown at people that tell us what we want to hear or at the very least tell us what can get the most attention.
> 
> I only ever get involved in these threads because the science behind what Gary does is correct, and often the theory gets bashed because the application of it is crap in his case.


I think reward based training is where you should start. Particularly with a puppy. I'm not opposed to a balanced approach. But I think a good balance is 90% good stuff (treats, praise, play, belly rubs) and 10% negative feedback (saying NO, doing a leash pop, using an e-collar). 

That being said, I am NOT an expert, I am learning and come on this site to learn.


----------



## beckster01

It took me until I finished the first full page of comments to realize the bonker was supposed to be a punishment 😂😂 I was sure it was supposed to be a positive interruptor (coming from a person who routinely throws toys at her puppy to get it to stop chewing the wall).


----------



## LuvShepherds

Aside from being a really old thread, throwing toys at a puppy is not training.


----------



## David Winners

How about smashing them over the head until they go into avoidance? Did you watch the videos? Terrible training.


----------



## Magwart

Wow, bonkers are a blast from the forum's past. It's one of those Bad Ideas That Won't Die threads.


----------



## tim_s_adams

beckster01 said:


> It took me until I finished the first full page of comments to realize the banker was suppowed to be a punishment 😂😂 I was sure it was supposed to be a positive interruptor (coming from a person who routinely throws toys at her puppy to get it to stop chewing the wall).


Throwing toys at your puppy IS teaching him something, but it likely isn't what you're hoping. And it won't teach him to stop chewing on the wall! 

Try showing him what he can chew on instead? How old is your dog?


----------



## Sunsilver

Tim, I think throwing a toy to the dog IS an effort to show him what he can chew! The idea of throwing it is to distract him, not hurt him.


----------



## LuvShepherds

Sunsilver said:


> Tim, I think throwing a toy to the dog IS an effort to show him what he can chew! The idea of throwing it is to distract him, not hurt him.


It’s a lazy way to try to teach something.


----------



## beckster01

Ok so I don’t throw the toy AT the puppy, I throw it FOR the puppy (If the dog is chewing a chair and sees a ball fly past him, he chases the ball instead of eating furniture). That’s what I thought the bonker was until I figured out there are people who think throwing things at their dogs head is a good way to discipline it. But how is engaging your dog in chase games lazy? I thought my comment about dogs eating walls would help my tone come across the internet lol. Also didn’t realize how old this thread was, it showed up with some more recent posts for some reason... sorry!


----------



## LuvShepherds

beckster01 said:


> Ok so I don’t throw the toy AT the puppy, I throw it FOR the puppy (If the dog is chewing a chair and sees a ball fly past him, he chases the ball instead of eating furniture). That’s what I thought the bonker was until I figured out there are people who think throwing things at their dogs head is a good way to discipline it. But how is engaging your dog in chase games lazy? I thought my comment about dogs eating walls would help my tone come across the internet lol. Also didn’t realize how old this thread was, it showed up with some more recent posts for some reason... sorry!


It’s fine, but you should understand the context of my posts. The bonker training idea is a very sensitive area for some of us. There was a lot of dissension created here by someone who insisted that throwing a bonker at a dog’s head or body was a good training method for aggression and all kinds of misbehaviors. Fortunately that person is not here anymore. I meant lazy as in throwing a pillow or rolled up towel at a dog’s head from a seated position rather than getting up and directly engaging the dog. Again, that goes back to someone who caused a lot of trouble and isn’t here anymore.


----------

