# Positive Training vs ?



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Those who are in favor of positive training seem to be down on whatever the alternative is. There are probably thousands of opinions on this subject.

I would like to know though what people consider positive and what it is that they are opposed to.

When my dog was a puppy he went to three obedience sessions. 70% of it was done with clicker and food treats. His third session he was bigger and stronger and we did some corrections with a prong collar. 

Now that he is mature I walk him with a prong collar for occasional corrections. Also have the prong on for better control if needed for any confrontation with human or dog. He is people and dog friendly so it has not really been an issue. He also did agility using mostly clicker. 

So am I a positive trainer for my dog or not.

What are the folks who define themselves as positive trainers against?

If you were looking for a pro trainer how would you determine positive?
How would you decide that a trainer was not right for you?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Almost all trainers are mostly positive - using some type of reward when the dog does what you want it to when you want it.

Some trainers that we have seen declare themselves to be "Positive only" and use no "punishment" or "aversives" and seem to feel that taking a positive thing away from a dog will teach him/her to do the thing you want them to. I.E. withhold any praise/reward from a dog who is counter-surfing and they will stop doing it. Withhold any reward from a dog who is lunging and snarling at another dog and treat the heck out of them when they stop and at some point the dog will "learn" that it is better to not react to another dog.

If it doesn't work then one needs to upgrade to a "higher value" treat.

At least that is what I have seen with this type of trainer.

Does it work? I think with some dogs it would work just fine, others not so well, and some never!

It is also rumored to take a LOT more time to train with "Pos Only" training (just what I have heard and seen).

To these folks, any correction (even the use of a "NO" voice correction) is "punishment" and is not to be used. And never a leash correction!


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

It really depends on the individual dog. Not all dogs can handle a correction from a prong collar. Instead of a correction, it might just rile the dog up even more or they just might not respond to that type of correction.

With your typical dog with solid nerves, I like to use positive training methods (praise, treats, clicker, etc), but I also have no problem popping a correction with a prong collar either as long as the dog can handle those types of corrections. I also have no problem using a no pull type harness instead of a prong if that works better.

My general feeling on dog training is you do what works. No ones going to get it right away, but that's what makes training fun. You need to work as a team with the dog to figure out what works. I always start with only positive type training when it comes to basic obedience, but sometimes that just doesn't always work.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

Hunter Jack said:


> So am I a positive trainer for my dog or not.
> 
> What are the folks who define themselves as positive trainers against?


 "Positive purists" (my own term) would not consider you a positive trainer due to the use of a prong collar on walks and during training. I'm not a positive enough trainer for "positive purists" because I will use a prong on a dog with a pulling problem and occasionally will use correction in training. Of course, most correction/dominance based trainers would view me as a positive trainer and tell me why the methods I use won't work on their dog or X type of dog 



codmaster said:


> Almost all trainers are mostly positive - using some type of reward when the dog does what you want it to when you want it.
> 
> Some trainers that we have seen declare themselves to be "Positive only" and use no "punishment" or "aversives" and seem to feel that taking a positive thing away from a dog will teach him/her to do the thing you want them to. I.E. withhold any praise/reward from a dog who is counter-surfing and they will stop doing it. Withhold any reward from a dog who is lunging and snarling at another dog and treat the heck out of them when they stop and at some point the dog will "learn" that it is better to not react to another dog.


 I can understand that you don't approve of positive trainers but these are really silly examples. Not a very accurate portrayal of how a good positive trainer actually works with dogs. 



codmaster said:


> If it doesn't work then one needs to upgrade to a "higher value" treat.
> 
> At least that is what I have seen with this type of trainer.
> 
> ...


There is a lot more to positive training methods than what you have come across at your local Petsmart. I'm not sure if you truly believe this is all that positive training is but there is a lot more to it and endless options for how to work with various problems. 

As for it taking longer, that hasn't been my experience at all. I have a 4 month old puppy who I have only had for about a month and he knows all sorts of stuff already and he's been trained using all positive. One example of issue I had with him that I addressed without correct is that he will leap or climb over anything I put him in to get to me. When I'm doing stuff in the house and can't watch him, he has to be able to stay in an expen or he has to be crated. Of course, I'd put him in the expen and he'd jump right out. So I started putting him in his crate whenever he'd climb out. I also made staying in the expen rewarding by having plenty of toys and chews in there. While he doesn't mind being in his crate, it didn't take very long at all for him to realize that it's more rewarding to stay in the expen.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

If you are really interested in this, and have a couple hours of free time, I suggest you watch all three of the free webinars from Susan Garrett a world-winning agility star/dog trainer. You can find them here:

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...training-video-susan-garrett-top-trainer.html

The point of her webinars are to help people understand positive-only based training and to help people realize that it _can_ be effective. But honestly, I'd just call these three webinars the baseline. Once you watch them, at least for me, watching this video response to a comment on her blog about how "corrections are needed and positive-only based training will never work" is a good way to solidify the idea:
Transitioning To "Do-Land" | Susan Garrett's Dog Training Blog

I think the idea of positive-only based training is intriguing. Very intriguing. I wonder how her world agility star quality border collies shape up to our high quality GSDs? I thought about starting my own thread about pure-positive based training as it relates to powerful landshark dogs like ours. Is it possible? I really don't know. I _do_ know that SG's positive-only trained BCs seem to have more desire to work than any other dog I've ever seen. I also know that when I was using collar corrections as my primary training method, it seemed to suck the life out of Pimg. It wasn't until I switched to clicker training that I saw her truely blossom and come to life; working with passion. Still- the reality is that someone like SG is able to spend massive amounts of time with her dogs. I wonder if you could still do positive-only training without having to spend 50% of your day with the dog (some of us have jobs and nobody else at home). I'm intrigued by the idea, but not sure how practical it is _specifically_ for GSDs.

I created this thread about a book which apparently (I have not read it yet) can scientifically prove that dogs learn better/faster/more thoroughly through positive only methods: http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/training-theory-methods/163582-defense-dogs-john-bradshaw.html

And lastly, I was recently made aware of this site which touts positive methods for Schutzhund training, which is fascinating: Clicker Training | Dog Training | Clicker Schutzhund | Positive Reinforcement


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Good trainers tailor the training to the dog. My female gets her feelings hurt if I correct too much or too hard. My male couldn't give a crap. My female also starts to get nutty if the reward is TOO big. Her favorite toy makes her get inaccurate and a poorer performance. Male gets better the bigger the prize. When I have my female in "the zone" her performance is very impressive and exceeds my males best performances


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

When my husband and I got our 1st GSD, Cheyenne, about 18 yrs ago, I had previously used a local trainer for my Doberman years before. I don't remember all the details of his training methods but basically he was yank & crank type trainer. Good old chain choker collar. Well when Cheyenne was about a yr old my husband went to take a bone from him and he growled. So we figured we'd better get professional help so I used the local guy I knew. I had trained Cheyenne, to the best of my ability, he was socialized & trusted off leash and used to go out with me on the trails loose with my horses every day. Anyway the trainer came to evaluate him and set him up & hung him by his neck for what seemed to be a very long time. This is what we were told to do when he exhibited that type of behavior. Needless to say my husband and I really didn't want to hang our dog and did not continue with that trainer. That was the same trainer who suggested we take one of his females. She was about 6, probably spent her whole life in a cage and she was TERRIFIED of my husband for no other reason than he was a male. I didn't know how to help her and we returned her. 
Years later when I got Apache, it was in my contract to go to puppy classes. My trainer is a reward based trainer but she also believes in a correction when needed. Not by hanging but more of a "hey, pay attention" tug tug to me "look here, oh very good". I only learned about clicker training last year when I got Lakota. Let me tell you I was amazed on how easy marking with the clicker and a reward got the results. I remember trying to teach Apache & Kiya to "look" I hated spitting the treat. With Lakota I used the clicker and it took no time at all. 
I also think (know) I caused my 2 older dogs to become reactive to other dogs a few years ago when we would get barked at and dogs we passed by would charge thier fences at us. By me correcting my dogs for barking the association was created that when you see another dog bark because moms gonna yell. Now I have tried to reverse that by doing little things I have learned like walking in an arch, getting my dog to focus on me before the situation escalated. 
I use a prong collar when out on our daily run, it's just easier. My dogs just don't pull on the prong. Verbal corrections are really all I have to do if I don't have them on a leash. When on leash I find the simple tug tug to get thier attention back if verbal didn't get them.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> ...............
> I can understand that you don't approve of positive trainers but these are really silly examples. Not a very accurate portrayal of how a good positive trainer actually works with dogs.
> 
> *On the contrary, I think that PO training can work great with some dogs, and esp. for teaching some behaviors - i.e. I did use PO training to teach my dog to "shake", "play dead", "crawl" and "roll over" and it worked great. Not a correction was ever used or needed. His DA, on the other hand, did not really improve using the PO methods that 2 different PO trainers suggested.*
> ...


*That is great about your puppy connecting his stay in the crate with not hopping over the pen! Wonder exactly what convinced him that the pen is more 'rewarding' than being in the crate? Probably just no toys and chews in the crate would do it once he looked around a little bit, I guess. Smart puppy!*

*BTW, I was simply repeating what I have heard from a number of authors and trainers about PO training regarding the fact that it would take longer than a more traditional approach; including Jean Donaldson's book and the 2 such trainers I worked with locally. They also didn't really care if the dog might be somewhat less reliable. *

*Are you saying that this is not true generally about PO trained dogs - they will in fact be trained just as fast and to an equal degree of reliability as a more traditional method utilizing some degree of negative reinforcement? I would be truly interested in your answer as I have always heard this about this type of training.*


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

Who cares? that's my reply. There's good training, bad training and everything in between. Show me your dog and I can tell what you are  I don't care what methods you use, they can all be used with great success. There's pro's and con's to all of them, some things have greater potential for success or a larger capacity to ruin your relationship, but then that's on YOU and how you use things. 

in the end, train your dog how you're comfortable and with the goal in mind. If your dog and you are happy together, who cares what people call you.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

crackem said:


> Who cares? that's my reply. There's good training, bad training and everything in between. Show me your dog and I can tell what you are  I don't care what methods you use, they can all be used with great success. There's pro's and con's to all of them, some things have greater potential for success or a larger capacity to ruin your relationship, but then that's on YOU and how you use things.
> 
> in the end, train your dog how you're comfortable and with the goal in mind. If your dog and you are happy together, who cares what people call you.


If you are referring to me as the OP. I don't personally care what anyone calls me. I asked what I would be considered by others as a means to opening what seems to be a recurring conversation on various threads. 

Until the dog that I have now, most training was pretty much the same. With him the clicker training worked well. He is also a GSD with a calm temperment and very solid nerves. I have had almost no issues.
I guess I'm old school in that I believe that I'm in charge not the dog and sometimes when I hear what seem to be pure positive folks there are things I don't understand. It seems sometimes they elevate the status of the dog to almost or equal status of the human. I could be wrong but it also seems that understanding what the dog is feeling, or could it have a health problem, or what am I doing wrong are some of the things that they might think about. 
I had one dog that growled at me over his food dish. That in not o.k. with me. I'm no dog trainer but I just wasn't going to let that happen so I grabbed him by his collar (flat collar) and took the dish away and went on about my business. By the time his next meal was due, he was hungry, so I sat down with the food dish between my feet and as he ate I moved it, touched it etc.. . I did that once and then tested him several times randomly after that. It never happened again. I'm reasonably sure that doesn't fit into pure positive but it worked. I didn't have to analyze the dog or his motives. I admit though that I don't fully understand the pure positive approach and would like to understand better where people are coming from and how they deal with issues. 
I seriously doubt that I will be fully converted but certainly would like to understand better.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I prefer to train in a positive manner. I find it completely unfair to throw a correction collar on a dog and correct it when it really has no idea what you want. I like to train the behavior first. Now, I primarily trained Jax with a prong collar and now have to go back and retrain her. I'm hoping she isn't ruined on the prong collar because it was used in the WRONG way so that we can use it to "fine tune" her obedience. I do not have a problem with corrections. I think dogs do understand them and the intent behind it.


----------



## spidermilk (Mar 18, 2010)

The more I learn about it the more I want to not any corrections at all. If my dog doesn't listen to me it is my fault for not motivating him enough. That is just based on how my dog responds to things- if he is enthusiastic about something he is so much better at it. Unfortunately, I cannot find any trainers in my area who believe in this. One place I went to they were putting pinch collars on toy sized dogs and the other one told me to squirt water in his face and yell no when he barks at other dogs. Bleh!

It might work for other people and their dogs- but that is not what me and my dog need.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I am not for or against any type of training (well I don't go along with really heavy handed, hang em type training) it depends on the dog.

My aussie for instance, has always been a soft girl, if I even tried to use a harsh correction on her, she'd melt..She has always responded to positive training..

My GSD's, well I can't say I've ever had any 'soft' dogs, but I can't say I've had stubborn dogs either. They've all been easy trainers, I'm not purely positive, I think any time you correct a dog it should be done with fairness. 

I have gone to a purely positive "purist" trainer (love the purist word!),,and I have to say, I was NOT impressed...They subscribe to absolutely NO corrections, and well frankly, it was a class that had alot of out of control dogs, and the trainers dog didn't impress me one bit either..."Come" was not in it's vocabulary..

I figure to each his own, and whatever floats your boat. For me, I like to mix things up, depending on the individual dog


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

spidermilk said:


> The more I learn about it the more I want to not any corrections at all. If my dog doesn't listen to me it is my fault for not motivating him enough. That is just based on how my dog responds to things- if he is enthusiastic about something he is so much better at it. Unfortunately, I cannot find any trainers in my area who believe in this. One place I went to they were putting pinch collars on toy sized dogs and the other one told me to squirt water in his face and yell no when he barks at other dogs. Bleh!
> 
> It might work for other people and their dogs- but that is not what me and my dog need.


Please no offense but you gave the type of response I was concerned about.
Dogs have a mind of their own and their individual genetics that contribute to what they may or may not want to do. I don't believe that the reason your dog doesn't listen is because you have not motivated him enough.
If your dog wants to pull the curtains off the wall or eat the neighbors dog even if your motivation theory were correct you would still need to do something *right now*.

If my dog decides to dig it has nothing to do with me. Lots of dogs will dig until they learn not to. Puppies in particular just do stuff. Just like kids they will try various things until they learn what is acceptable and what isn't.

JacodaCD. I thought your response was thoughtful and reasoned, with a good measure of common sense.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have not met a purely positive trainer in many years. 

If grabbing a food aggressive dog and giving it a good what for worked, I would say there is a very good chance that was not much of a case of food aggression. I have seen very
food aggressive dogs in which that made the next feeding so much worse. What option for the person who can not manhandle a dog or intimidate?

I don't know many purely positive trainers. Haven't met one in years. It is important not to label people using sound principles of behavioral work as being purely positive. They are not faint of hesrt, hopelessly mushy or prone to humanizing dogs.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Samba.

I'm not trying to label anyone. As I said in another thread words mean different things to different people. We can argue over positve training vs pure positive vs old school vs yank and crank but instead we will wind up discussing extremes and all those terms I just used will mean different things to different people. I had hoped for some concrete examples because folks throw around those terms and others but what does any type of training mean if you can't give an example.
Look at spidermilks post. What will she do if her dog becomes aggressive.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Hunter Jack said:


> I had hoped for some concrete examples because folks throw around those terms and others but what does any type of training mean if you can't give an example.


I gave you links to concrete examples, including how a pure-positive trainer handles problem issues. Like I said, someone had commented on her blog about how "pure positive" training can't _possibly_ handle a dog that is DA or getting into something, or a host of other issues that are seemingly impossible to correct "without actually _correcting_ the dog."

I agree- it's incredibly hard to wrap your mind around how _not_ correcting the dog could fix problem behaviors. But real "pure positive" trainers (well at least Susan Garrett) has figured out how to do it for her dogs.

If you don't feel like watching the whole webinar series, then here's a direct link to where she does a video response to the poster knocking her methods: 





...I'm hardly trying to push the webinar on you. My entire point is that I've had (and continue to have) the same questions that you brought up in this thread. If the dog tears down the curtains, or rips apart your DVD cases, or attacks your bookshelf- how in the world can you correct that "without correcting?" She actually _does_ answer some of those questions, which is why I think it's worthwhile too watch if you are having such questions.

Enjoy.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Oh, spidermilk lives 100 miles from me! She can come visit!


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Susan G. is successful in her training. She has not had particularly easy dogs either. She lives with and develops relationships with her dogs. She is positive in approach but not at all permissive. She has learned to create control and much self control in her dogs.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Samba said:


> Susan G. is successful in her training. She has not had particularly easy dogs either. She lives with and develops relationships with her dogs. She is positive in approach but not at all permissive. She has learned to create control and much self control in her dogs.


Which is why I think she's an excellent case study in such training methods. I am not sure it's practical to be able to do what she does without having massive amounts of time to spend with the dogs (and I'd love to be able to ask her about that), but I still think she's worth looking into for info on such training methods.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I think some of Susan's success at this is because of who she is in entirety.

I learned the gifted psychotherapists bring there entire being to a process. For instance, Rogerian therapy...well people filmed the work and tried to repeat the steps, but it does not work as well! 

Great trainers seem to me to be more than the sum of the parts. Others try to take a method try to repeat the steps but it is not so easy to get the same results. In her responses, I think Susan may need to realize this when she is answering people who say "it takes so long to get there".


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

I think you have a great point there, and not sure I have much else to add. It would be really fun to see if one could raise a GSD without ever issuing a correction. You know- just to see.

There's probably plenty of people who would say that a well bred GSD shouldn't be phase by corrections. I wouldn't disagree. I do think it would be interesting to see the relationship dynamics with such training though, and I suspect there could be very unique differences compared to a non-_purely_-positive trained dog. Of course that's an assumption.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

wildo said:


> I gave you links to concrete examples, including how a pure-positive trainer handles problem issues. Like I said, someone had commented on her blog about how "pure positive" training can't _possibly_ handle a dog that is DA or getting into something, or a host of other issues that are seemingly impossible to correct "without actually _correcting_ the dog."
> 
> I agree- it's incredibly hard to wrap your mind around how _not_ correcting the dog could fix problem behaviors. But real "pure positive" trainers (well at least Susan Garrett) has figured out how to do it for her dogs.
> 
> ...


SG is a great agility trainer. I don't know much about agility, as far as I've gone has been just to do something different from OB, tracking and protection and have a different kind of fun with my dogs.

that said, I don't find agility to be all that similiar to how i'd train ob for a number of reasons.

But if you're going to post this video as proof to "do land" as she calls it and how attainable it is maybe she should have edited out around 15 minutes. The dog breaks it's down, she grabs the leash pulls the dog to her and grabs it by the neck and the dog is pulling away. She then lets go and the dog goes down. 

YOu tell me how that is any different than taking the leash, giving a pop and moving on??? I'd love to know. Other than her not getting emotional about it, like a lot of people do (and that is a mistake) i don't think there is anything different.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

crackem said:


> The dog breaks it's down, she grabs the leash pulls the dog to her and grabs it by the neck and the dog is pulling away. She then lets go and the dog goes down.
> 
> YOu tell me how that is any different than taking the leash, giving a pop and moving on??? I'd love to know.


You can read Susan's own words on the subject since I asked that specifically:



> Willy says:
> Tuesday, July 19, 2011 at 2:00am
> Very interesting. I find you very persuasive. However, did you not give Swagger a collar correction when stood up? You reached up and touched his collar when he offered a behavior you didn’t want- isn’t that a correction? Sure you didn’t “pop” it, but for a dog that is [potentially] never corrected- the collar grab could be enough. Just trying to understand what you did there… Thanks for this series, I’ve learned a lot through it!
> 
> ...


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Blocking behavior


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

wildo said:


> I think the idea of positive-only based training is intriguing. Very intriguing. I wonder how her world agility star quality border collies shape up to our high quality GSDs? I thought about starting my own thread about pure-positive based training as it relates to powerful landshark dogs like ours. Is it possible? I really don't know. I _do_ know that SG's positive-only trained BCs seem to have more desire to work than any other dog I've ever seen. I also know that when I was using collar corrections as my primary training method, it seemed to suck the life out of Pimg. It wasn't until I switched to clicker training that I saw her truely blossom and come to life; working with passion. Still- the reality is that someone like SG is able to spend massive amounts of time with her dogs. I wonder if you could still do positive-only training without having to spend 50% of your day with the dog (some of us have jobs and nobody else at home). I'm intrigued by the idea, but not sure how practical it is _specifically_ for GSDs.


 Glad SG's free webinars are still up - excellent resource for people wondering about positive training. 

If you are wodnering how her methods would work with a dog who isn't easy, you need to read her Shaping Success book. It is about her old BC Buzz who most people encouraged to her to place because he was "too crazy to be an agility dog". He was the first dog she really wanted to try "all positive" methods with and was certainly a challenge. It also gives a pretty good idea of how she makes positive training work in every day life. Also her Ruff love book explains a lot about using positive methods in everyday life and addressing everyday problems with it.

I used very little correction with Jora's training - she was my first "clicker puppy". She was intense, high drive, powerful and everything a GSD bitch should be. One of the smartest dogs I have ever worked with and so enthusiastic to do anything I wanted to do with her. I did end up using a prong collar to walk her when she was younger, after I couldn't ignore how sad a GL made her. Really she was easier to walk off leash than on LOL She had a very strong recall and was really good about not wandering too far away when she was loose - she'd always come check in, even if the dogs she was loose with were really far away. Her biggest issues had to do with impulse control but I admit that was more a short coming of mine than the methods I used. She was my first very high drive dog and I loved her wild exuberance 





codmaster said:


> *That is great about your puppy connecting his stay in the crate with not hopping over the pen! Wonder exactly what convinced him that the pen is more 'rewarding' than being in the crate? Probably just no toys and chews in the crate would do it once he looked around a little bit, I guess. Smart puppy!*


 He is pretty clever  And yes, I think you are exactly right. He has a choice of where he wants to spend time when I'm unable to watch him. Choice A is a roomy pen with lots of toys to play with and bones or stuffed KONGs to chew on. Choice B is a crate with nothing but a towel in the bottom. 





codmaster said:


> *Are you saying that this is not true generally about PO trained dogs - they will in fact be trained just as fast and to an equal degree of reliability as a more traditional method utilizing some degree of negative reinforcement? I would be truly interested in your answer as I have always heard this about this type of training.*


 My personal experience is that many things take just a fraction of the time to teach using positive methods vs. correction based. And that behaviors taught with positive training seems to require less maintenance than traditional methods. For example, I have noticed my dogs remember tricks that I taught them years ago that I had almost forgotten about and hadn't asked them to do in forever. It also depends on what your expectations are. An ear pinch retrieve may seem to be quicker than a shaped retrieve for a dog in that you can usually get the dog taking the dumbbell in a few sessions. But it can take a long time to shape a retrieve on a dog who absolutely does not want to put anything in their mouth. However, IME dogs trained with a shaped retrieve tend to be extremely solid once it's learned and will retrieve anything they are asked to. Ear pinch trained dogs seem to need more maintenance to keep the behavior strong and some eventually learn to be "ring wise" or know when the handler can't correct them. 

I don't mean to sound like all Petsmart trainers are bad. Some are actually knowledgeable, experience trainers. Many though have never actually trained their dogs to do much and their experience is limited to the short Petsmart instructor course. I constantly see examples of poor training at my local Petsmart. Watching them makes it obvious why positive training is often viewed as unreliable and not terribly effective except for the easiest behaviors. I actually watched one of the Petsmart instructors attempting to teach a client's dog not to pull. She had the dog on a harness and allowed the dog to drag her all over the store. Once in a while the dog would stop to sniff something, she'd click (while the dog is still straining on the leash) and drop a handful of treats on the floor 

Which brings us to for why I felt the example of letting a lunging dog bark and snarl at other dogs then treating with increasingly better treats when they stopped was silly. While I'm sure some trainers probably suggest such things, it isn't a good example of positive training and is honestly, pretty unlikely to change the dog's behavior. I have had the absolute best success using abandonment training with dogs who were reactive or aggressive towards other dogs on leash. In abandonment training, the dog is worked on a very long line at first that is secured and their regular collar. The first session is best done working the dog with another dog in sight but far enough away to keep the dog under threshold. This helps to build a baseline of working with other dogs. Once that is done, the "decoy dog" will begin moving closer and closer. As long as the reactive dog doesn't react, they are rewarded. As soon as they react, the owner drops the leash and leaves for a few minutes at a time. There is a bit more to it than that but that is the general idea.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

AgileGSD said:


> If you are wodnering how her methods would work with a dog who isn't easy, you need to read her Shaping Success book.
> Also her Ruff love book explains a lot about using positive methods in everyday life and addressing everyday problems with it.


As it were, I just ordered both books last night.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I utilized the Ruff Love outline with my two rescues. They were older dogs who had no reference for a training relationship and were wild and crazy! It worked very well.

I have seen PO dogs fail to retrieve and dogs with a correction fail to retrieve. How to check that out
statistically, I don't know. There are so many variables in the reliability of the behavior. I find that many behaviors trained positively can become very reliable.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

you can change the words to mean whatever you want. Facts are she grabbed the collar, pulled the dog to her, grabbed the neck and pulled. call it blocking, call it a correction, call it momma dog grabbing a puppy, call it whatever you want. 

I find it funny that people can't see just who similiar they are.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I find them similar. I know she is not permissive in her approach to dogs. This may be one of the most important aspects that allows lots oF positive training.

There is a big part tgat is the trainer, not the methods so much. I can train behaviors with positive methds and with corrections of a certain nature applied in a certain way.How this all goes depends a lot on who the trainer is. It is difficult to put this into words. One needs to observe those with mastery in action and then try to apply it until one develops as a trainer. Why some people are good at training and why some are not, no matter what the method?

Behavioral problems can be a bugger when people go to applying force. I find good success with the behaviorsts protocols. Not so much thinking about positive or negative in those! They are about efficacy, ease of utuilization, minimizing fallout, etc


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Wildo. 

I did appreciate the links you provided and did watch the video. You and AgileGSD's comments have been very helpful. Part of my questioning comes from the perspective of the companion animal owner. My dog by his breeding should be able to do anything but he is stuck with me. Sometimes I realize that a lot of my questions are based on the Joe average dog owner. People who show their dogs or do shutzhund, especially for the purpose of titling I would think (most probably) do not work at Kmart and can afford the time and training. 
Do you think the average person could learn enough from a book or DVD to train in the manner of Susan?
I worked in aerospace for years and was raising kids, living payday to payday like a lot of people. I worked from 8 hours to 16 hours a day and sometimes Sat.'s.
Maybe I was just lucky but I almost always had 1 or 2 dogs and with the exception of the psycho. Border Collie from a rescue I really didn't have hardly any issues with them as pets. On the other hand most of the problem dogs I have seen are pets.
Animal companions make up the vast majority of dogs in the U.S. So I really hope that whatever methods are used we come up with some affordable training methods.
I think clicker and treat training for basic obedience work really well. I'm still not convinced about aggressive dogs or fearful dogs. I'm not saying it doesn't work I'm saying I don't know how many average people have the time or money.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Hunter Jack said:


> Do you think the average person could learn enough from a book or DVD to train in the manner of Susan?
> I worked in aerospace for years and was raising kids, living payday to payday like a lot of people. I worked from 8 hours to 16 hours a day and sometimes Sat.'s.


Hmmm... I don't know. Maybe. In many ways, my situation doesn't sound much different than yours. I don't have a "crazy awesome quality" dog. My dog is straight from the puppy mill. I'm a software engineer and often put in long hours. (Well, not so much lately, but historically I've work mucho overtime.) I am only recently discovering *pure* positive reinforcement. I've used a mix of positive and assertive just like most people, and I've maintained the impression that it is impossible to use _pure_ positive. SG's webinars and other info are impressive and convincing for me. I don't know if I, an average joe schmoe, can learn enough about it from a couple DVDs and books- but I can tell you that I'm going to try.

Maybe it's a new fad (not sure the history of PO reinforcement) or what, but I find it fascinating. My dog works so much better when I am not constantly correcting her; it truly makes me wonder what it would be like if I _never_ corrected her. Maybe not good. Maybe great. I really don't know, but I am willing to put in the time and see.

My problem is that I am very impatient and easily fall back to verbal and physical corrections when pushed. But you know- it's a learning process. There's nothing wrong with that. The two books weren't that expensive overall. I'll give them a read and then form my own, slightly more educated, opinion.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

One thin I learned over the years that isn't exactly training but helped me a bunch is to remain calm. If I freak out my dogs will tend to follow suit. If I act calm then so do they.


----------



## TankGrrl66 (Jun 29, 2010)

Technically...

All dog training is positive. Yank and crank type training uses positive punishment. They add an aversive stimulus to reduce the frequency of a behavior. 

Clicker trainer types use positive reinforcement. They are also technically negative because WHEN punishment needs to happen, it is negative. Ex: Removing a desirable stimulus to reduce the frequency of a behavior. 

It is all about those four quadrants being used effectively... JMO


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

One topic that a local PO dog trainer used to quote to me as proof that this type of training really works was the example of trainers using this method who were working at Seaworld and using it to train killer whales. Has anybody else ever heard of this as an example of the efficiency of the PO approach?

I haven't heard any use of this as an example lately however, so I don't know if it still used by PO advocates as proof of how well the approach works, even with animals that we cannot put a leash on to train.

Just curious.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

actually a friend of mine who is a trainer, worked with dolphins/whales and tigers,,she isn't "purely" positive, but I would say mostly positive, and does credit alot of what she learned working with wild animals..


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

i've only used praise, treats and petting
when training or when my dog is laying on the floor
doing nothing. i've never used a prong, harness, Halti, etc.
i use a flat collar untill their 6 months and then i use
a choker. i never pop the leash or use any force
on the choker. my dog/dogs heel on either side
on or off leash. when we're walking around (off leash,
98% of the time) i can say "other side" and my dog switches
sides no matter what side he's on and no matter what
distraction we encounter (he hasn't reacted to anything
so far; he's 4 yrs old). i find training a dog is easy. you have to
be consistent and i don't think you need a heavy hand, prongs,
halters, etc.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

i've never trained a whale or a tiger but i think i would
use positive, very, very, positive training. :crazy:



JakodaCD OA said:


> actually a friend of mine who is a trainer, worked with dolphins/whales and tigers,,she isn't "purely" positive, but I would say mostly positive, and does credit alot of what she learned working with wild animals..


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

yeah, that's it. i have to read this 7 more times
to understand it but i'm agreeing after reading it once.
i think i'm going to go and add some aversive stimulus to
reduce the frequency of my behavior. :crazy:



TankGrrl66 said:


> Technically...
> 
> All dog training is positive. Yank and crank type training uses positive punishment. They add an aversive stimulus to reduce the frequency of a behavior.
> 
> ...


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

JakodaCD OA said:


> actually a friend of mine who is a trainer, worked with dolphins/whales and tigers,,she isn't "purely" positive, but I would say mostly positive, and does credit alot of what she learned working with wild animals..


How would she "punish" a tiger? (Besides VERY carefully, I would think!)


----------



## dogmama (Nov 17, 2006)

*Not black & white*

Several people have already said it - training methods depend on the dog and on the owner's expectations. I am an advocate for positive training, however, my high drive Czech dog needs leadership. I've done some great things with positive reinforcement BUT there are times when the treat just isn't enough. I can wave a steak in front of him but if he wants something else (i.e., chase a rabbit) - forget it. That's when the leadership in the form of a halti or prong come into play.

_Teaching_, in most cases, is best done with positive reinforcement. That includes proofing. But when Zack makes the conscious decision to flip me the paw, there are consequences.

I'm talking about basic training and obviously making some assumptions. Dogs that are hyper-excited (like Zack in the car or Zack around other dogs) won't do well with negative consequences. It just jacked him up more. So true behavior modification in the form of introducing the stimulus slowly and rewarding calmness is key. This is where reading the dog becomes extremely important - watching pupils dilate, breathing quicken, etc. I don't believe in adverse consequences in these situations because the dog hasn't consciously made a decision to blow me off.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

or a whale?? 



codmaster said:


> How would she "punish" a tiger? (Besides VERY carefully, I would think!)


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

"But when Zack makes the conscious decision *to flip me the paw,* there are consequences."

ROFLMAO! But sadly I see the same thing sometimes.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

doggiedad said:


> or a whale??


 
Absolutely the same, esp. if I am in the water!


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

JakodaCD OA said:


> actually a friend of mine who is a trainer, worked with dolphins/whales and tigers,,she isn't "purely" positive, but I would say mostly positive, and does credit alot of what she learned working with wild animals..


They had to train them positive because no one was willing to try to put a prong collar on any of them.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

codmaster said:


> One topic that a local PO dog trainer used to quote to me as proof that this type of training really works was the example of trainers using this method who were working at Seaworld and using it to train killer whales. Has anybody else ever heard of this as an example of the efficiency of the PO approach?
> 
> I haven't heard any use of this as an example lately however, so I don't know if it still used by PO advocates as proof of how well the approach works, even with animals that we cannot put a leash on to train.
> 
> Just curious.


 I think it's a pretty weak way of proving a point actually. Really, now hard is it to train an animal that is locked in a cage and gets it's only source of food from you. That's tough. If things don't go the way you like, you pick up your pail of fish and leave, if only real life was so easy.


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

doggiedad said:


> i've only used praise, treats and petting
> when training or when my dog is laying on the floor
> doing nothing. i've never used a prong, harness, Halti, etc.
> i use a flat collar untill their 6 months and then i use
> ...


Just out of curiosity, why do you switch from a flat collar to a choker? It sounds like they don't need it at all.


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Good_Karma said:


> Just out of curiosity, why do you switch from a flat collar to a choker? It sounds like they don't need it at all.


Great question. A choker is not far from a prong, actually it is more restraint than a prong because a prong's resistance is spread out over a wider area and won't choke the dog.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

How would positive be used on dog aggression (people or other dogs)?

All dogs are different but what is a ball park estimate of the time required?


----------



## Upham (Jul 10, 2011)

I think the important thing is to build trust with your dog. So they are able to see you as a strong leader.

I prefers to use a standard collar or harness. The idea of a prong collar or choker just doesn't appeal to me. I don't want to stoop to using some device to get me there. 

I just have faith that I can get there without there aid.

But if my dog was a danger to others and a need to get a handle on it quick then I'm willing to use a prong or choker.

I think it all depends on the situation, and what you hope to achieve.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Hunter Jack said:


> How would positive be used on dog aggression (people or other dogs)?
> 
> All dogs are different but what is a ball park estimate of the time required?


Good luck getting an answer on your second question from anyone! I never could even get any time req. from the PO trainers that I have tried working with.

For your first question I got a lot of thoughts (none worked very well - until I finally found a more balanced trainer - who was a ScH and K9 trainer for many years). The PO people (and I don't know if this is typical but all three different ones used the same general approach) - said to turn and guide him away from the other dog, then treat heavily when he stopped reacting, and do it again and again.

And also keep him under his "reaction" distance and treat when he is quiet and not reacting. But not one of them had a good answer for what to do if he snubbed the treats I had (except to "Use a 'Higher value' treat" was the commom mantra) - of course I tried chicken and hot dog pieces with essentially the same results, once he got worked up!

It was amazing what a difference in breaking his attention on the other dog that one good correction made and THEN working him with some rapid obedience commands.

Naturally this was just my experience with a sometimes DA reactive dog with a BIG dose of self confidence.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

codmaster said:


> Good luck getting an answer on your second question from anyone! I never could even get any time req. from the PO trainers that I have tried working with.


 I don't think any trainer can really say how long X will take to work through with any given dog. No matter what methods are used, how quickly and effectively anything will work depends a great deal on the individual owner and dog involved. 

I have seen progress with abandonement training after just the first session though and in the worst case that I dealt with using it (a GSD who was so reactive she couldn't be in a group class with other dogs), it took 6 or so one week sessions to work through it. That seems pretty quick to me, considering the dog's entire attitude towards dogs approaching changed in that time, not just the dog's reaction.



codmaster said:


> The PO people (and I don't know if this is typical but all three different ones used the same general approach) - said to turn and guide him away from the other dog, then treat heavily when he stopped reacting, and do it again and again.
> 
> And also keep him under his "reaction" distance and treat when he is quiet and not reacting. But not one of them had a good answer for what to do if he snubbed the treats I had (except to "Use a 'Higher value' treat" was the commom mantra) - of course I tried chicken and hot dog pieces with essentially the same results, once he got worked up.


 I wouldn't expect that method to work well to be honest. If the dog is reacting, it doesn't really matter what you do once the dog stops. The dog will still tend to continue to react first because that is what feels good to the dog at the time. They are upset about dogs getting close and it feels right to them to react. Eating a treat after being pulled away from dogs they react to isn't going to change what feels right to them when a dog approaches again.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

One has to work below threshold to have the best results. Once they get "worked up" the training is not being done as it is intended.

I have seen really good success with behavioral mod fone correctly. LAT worked great with my dog intense Catahoula. Control Unleashed is a book with some great techniques. I am amazed with so much successful work done in this area that more dog people are not aware of its usefulness.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I do not want to pinch or poke or shock my dog to get it to do what I want. I do not want to yank it by the neck or POP it. I do not want to put it on its side, dominate it, push it in position because I am significantly larger than the dog. 

I do not want to wear a belt with a place for a tug toy, a bad for treats, a clicker, a remote, a can of pennies, etc. 

My dogs are individuals, not robots. This is very true. Some will respond to body language, some the tone of my voice, some will work for praise, some will go bananas if praised high and happy. My job is to find what motivates them, and to use that with the proper timing. 

Good trainers have good timing, are confident, and have good command over their body language. Ceasar could get just as good results with positive methods if he would just buy into it. And this Susan person could get good results with compulsion to a point.  If the trainer does not believe in the method, they will not make it happen. If the trainer feels bad using a method, it will not have the best outcome. 

I use treats with puppies then quickly get them out of the picture. My dogs make it through most of their training with no treats, just praise. Praise works wonderful, and it is free, it does not stink up your pocket, you will not be NQ'd for having it in your pocket. 

Praise and timing is a combination that can get much farther than all the training collars and gadgets put together. 

So if you can get from a to b without using punishment, why would you not? 

I do use voice corrections, I am not afraid of the work NO, or MINE, I do not like physical corrections. And I would rather set a dog up to succeed and praise them for it, than set a dog up to fail and punish him for it. 

It works for me.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Every trainer should use what works for their particular dog(s).

The choice of words can play a definite role in peoples perceptions of training methods.

"Compulsion", "Punishment", "Aversion" sure sound a lot worse than simply "Correction", don't they?

How about "Permissive" instead of "Positive"? If one doesn't compell your pooch to do something when you tell him/her to do it, aren't you being "Permissive"? If you let the dog decide when (if?) he will do something, could we call that approach "Permissive"?

When one of the trainers I use wanted to teach my dog "Leave It" regarding walking by a cup filled with dog treats in it, she let him go out on his leash and just held the leash while he tried to get to the cup. She did nothing while he strained (a little) to get over to it. Then when he finally turned his head back to her, she treated him and praised him. Took a few minutes and she never did get him to actually walk by the cup on a loose leash. (She is Pos only obviously).

I took the leash and walked him toward the cup, he pulled to it and I gave him a LITTLE leash pop and told him "Leave It" before the pop and only poped him when he continued the pull. Then when the pop got his attention and he came back to me - much praise and a little treat. The second time he did better and by the third he was walking right by the cup with nary a glance.

So was that "cruel and unusual *PUNISHMENT*" that I inflicted on my poor pooch? He didn't seem too afflicted by it and seemed to learn the command very quickly.

NO - it was a couple of small corrections that simply reminded him what I wanted. BTW he already had covered the "Leave it" command in the past and would do it pretty good, so we were basically "proofing" the behavior with a new situation and new object and even for a while a new handler (who he really really likes!).

Anyway just a small personal event, and I would be interested in other peoples reaction to a direct comparison between two different approches to teaching a very useful command.

BTW, the trainer was surprised at his behavior while I handled him. This was in a "walking" obedience class through the downtown area of a small nearby city with 4 other handlers in the class.


----------



## MountainGSDs (Jul 25, 2011)

Positive only is a great way to train and a great way to raise kids too. Watch the kids running through restaurants and screaming, LOL. Life without unpleasant consequences. "sarcasm"


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Ain't that the truth!


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

codmaster said:


> Every trainer should use what works for their particular dog(s).
> 
> The choice of words can play a definite role in peoples perceptions of training methods.
> 
> ...


That works great when you have a leash attached to your dog. 

I have a Schip mix and a Chow mix (breeds that can be rabbit/prey driven for reference, and my two are) who had found a rabbit in the fenced yard. They were "tossing it" back and forth when I saw them. I had trained leave its using increasingly interesting items, with the reward. A rabbit...not something I had anticipated. 

I yelled LEAVE IT - and they did, came to me, we went in the house and they got cheese. Did they want to leave it? Probably not! But they knew if they did, they would get a high reward item. So there I was a hundred feet away or so...there they were full of the fun of the hunt...

Bunny got out. :crazy:

If are not ever going to try these things - why keep asking?


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Purely positive training and purely correction training is IMO cruel. It has to be very confusing/stressful for a dog. 

codmaster- For "leave it" I taught it differently. 

We had a leave it treat. Dog tries to sniff/eat it. Cover it up with your foot. Tell the dog to leave it. Move foot away. Dog tries to sniff again. Verbal correction then leave it command cover with your foot if needed. Treat/praise everytime the dog obeys. - like Jean described we increased the leave it lure from 1 treat to a mountain of treats to a ball rolling by. Now it works for anything (have not had to test it off leash vs wild animals yet)

My dog responds to verbal corrections. If something harsher like a leash pop is needed I would do so. 

I think corrections should be fair. Training basic OB should not require harsh corrections..you are teaching. I've seen people teaching something and start off with light leash corrections and if the dog hasn't picked it up after a few tries they go to harsher corrections...maybe you are teaching the dog in a way it doesn't understand. Now you have taught it to ignore little corrections.

Think of a parent who yells all the time vs a parent that rarely yells. I know which one has more effect.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That works great when you have a leash attached to your dog.
> 
> *True for the correction part to teach the dog that he can't do that behavior - that is training. Without the leash, then you are basically testing/proofing the behavior; and if it doesn't work then additional training is needed.*
> 
> ...


Try what things? Reward based training? I do use treats and rewards in training. 

Taught Baron to "Shake" his paw in about 10 minutes with treats (very food driven). Taught him to "Crawl" in not much longer! So yes I do teach with all approaches. Some behaviors need a different approach sometimes. BTW, I also taught him to wait to go out or in the house using mostly positive with only a little verbal reminder and a closing of the door sometimes - 98% reliable now.

BTW, I would be curious as to just what you would have done if your two just kept chasing the rabbit after your verbal command "Leave it"?

You sound as if you think that each of your two dogs decided that they wanted the cheese (or other reward that you had waiting for them) more than chasing the rabbit. What do you do with a dog who favors the rabbit (or other thing they are doing at the time, i.e. sniffing for example) MORE than the treat that they think that you might have?

When you taught "Leave it" to them originally, did you also include in the training that they had to come back to you as part of the command? That sounds like you did one heck of a training job with your two dogs.

I would be very interested in how you did that as I have just taught him to stop his interest in the thing I tell him "Leave It" about and did not include any other behavior with it. Basically just to continue whatever he was doing at the time he took notice of something that I did not want him to mess with.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> That works great when you have a leash attached to your dog.
> 
> *True for the correction part to teach the dog that he can't do that behavior - that is training. Without the leash, then you are basically testing/proofing the behavior; and if it doesn't work then additional training is needed.*
> 
> ...


Try what things? Reward based training? I do use treats and rewards in training. 

Taught Baron to "Shake" his paw in about 10 minutes with treats (very food driven). Taught him to "Crawl" in not much longer! So yes I do teach with all approaches. Some behaviors need a different approach sometimes. BTW, I also taught him to wait to go out or in the house using mostly positive with only a little verbal reminder and a closing of the door sometimes - 98% reliable now.

BTW, I would be curious as to just what you would have done if your two just kept chasing the rabbit after your verbal command "Leave it"?

You sound as if you think that each of your two dogs decided that they wanted the cheese (or other reward that you had waiting for them) more than chasing the rabbit. What do you do with a dog who favors the rabbit (or other thing they are doing at the time, i.e. sniffing for example) MORE than the treat that they think that you might have?

When you taught "Leave it" to them originally, did you also include in the training that they had to come back to you as part of the command? That sounds like you did one heck of a training job with your two dogs.

I would be very interested in how you did that as I have just taught him to stop his interest in the thing I tell him "Leave It" about and did not include any other behavior with it. Basically just to continue whatever he was doing at the time he took notice of something that I did not want him to mess with.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The OP started with the premise that positive trainers dislike other training methods. But I find it funny that most people who use other methods are adamant that positive training methods would not work with all dogs or their dog, or take much longer, or are too cumbersome, ineffectual, permissive, unrealistic for their situation. 

I find some of them almost angry in their defense of compulsive methods/using physical corrections. Positive people are saying, "I don't, I haven't, I find..." And the other's are demanding, "you can't, you haven't...." It is like it is a personal attack to suggest that I do not find prong collars necessary, and if they can get more people to say yes to their methods, it validates the method.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I had to train Arwen with all positive training. We used to walk all over town off lead. She kicked up a rabbit and started to go and just by saying Heel. She came right back. I do not know how any other training method could have done better, unless she had no spirit at all, terrified of me, or had been trained at a bunny rabbit reserve and specifically trained to pay no attention to rabbits jumping up and running.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

"....people who use other methods are adamant that positive training methods would not work with all dogs or their dog, or take much longer, or are too cumbersome, ineffectual, permissive, unrealistic for their situation."

Agreed!


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

selzer said:


> The OP started with the premise that positive trainers dislike other training methods. But I find it funny that most people who use other methods are adamant that positive training methods would not work with all dogs or their dog, or take much longer, or are too cumbersome, ineffectual, permissive, unrealistic for their situation.
> 
> I find some of them almost angry in their defense of compulsive methods/using physical corrections. Positive people are saying, "I don't, I haven't, I find..." And the other's are demanding, "you can't, you haven't...." It is like it is a personal attack to suggest that I do not find prong collars necessary, and if they can get more people to say yes to their methods, it validates the method.


Interesting Selzer.
I find the view you ascribe to those who use other or mixed methods is the problem with the PO people. To many PO's it's the *only* way. Their way or the highway. Plus you make "the other way" sound cold, heartless, mean and any other derogatory term you would like to add in there.

There may be some out there like that but most of us on this forum use clicker and treats but are not adverse to correction. Such as a short swift pull to focus attention towards or away from a behavior.
If people don't want to do that fine but don't make us out to be cruel human beings mistreating our dogs.


----------



## DunRingill (Dec 28, 2007)

Hunter Jack said:


> Interesting Selzer.
> I find the view you ascribe to those who use other or mixed methods is the problem with the PO people. To many PO's it's the *only* way. Their way or the highway. Plus you make "the other way" sound cold, heartless, mean and any other derogatory term you would like to add in there.


Agreed, that's been my observation too. Can't even tell you how many times I've been told "Well GOOD trainers don't need to use physical corrections on ANY dogs." Obvious implications there. 

hey I don't care, people can train however they like. My dogs are well-behaved and happy, and my classes have a waiting list


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

DunRingill said:


> Agreed, that's been my observation too. Can't even tell you how many times I've been told "Well GOOD trainers don't need to use physical corrections on ANY dogs." Obvious implications there..................


Absolutely the case around here as well. In fact, talking to some of the local PO trainers is sort of similar to talking with reformed alcholics, or maybe religious fanatics - won't listen to any other view or approach for any problem at all. 

If you don't follow their method, then you are "abusing" your dog and are generally a Neanderthall trainer following clearly outdated methods and not paying any attention to "scientific proof" of dog training methods.

AAAHHHHH!


----------



## Redhawk (Jul 8, 2011)

Interesting thread, it does seem to get everyone riled up. What fun 

I have to second/third what someone else said on here - that who you are as a person, how you conduct yourself and communicate to your dog, how you read your dogs needs and anticipate it's actions, is **MUCH MORE** important than if you are using positive reinforcement only or reinforcements and corrections. 

I don't think dogs care as much HOW you teach them what you teach them, but that you teach them in a fair, consistent, reasonable manner.

I have seen dogs with bad trainers using corrections become fearful, but on the other hand, I have seen dogs with bad trainers using PO become anxious, super alert and NEVER able to relax. Sometimes it seems every movement someone makes, every sound they hear, they are checking out to see if it is food coming. Smart dogs also make 'mistakes' just so a not-so-smart trainer can wait for good behavior and reward them again. 

People say you can't hurt a dog using PO, which seems to be why some like it so much, but I very much disagree. You can corrode away a dogs calm, relaxed manner if you use positive reinforcements badly. Those super anxious, revved up dogs, which were not naturally born that way are obviously not happy.

Many dogs nowadays remind me of what we have done to our kids - video games, candy, sugar, so much mindless TV, phones, etc, so much positive stimulation they never get a chance to sit back and enjoy life and just be happy without a physical reward. Sometimes piece of mind, stillness and calm is it's own reward, for dogs I believe, as well as people.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Redhawk.

That deserves a :hug:


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I hope you cold, heartless, mean trainers pray to whatever higher power you believe in that the trainers that mess up dogs with positive only training, stick with it, and do not cross over the aisle. If they can mess up a dog with the clicker and treats, well what might they do with alpha rolls, or training collars?


----------



## Redhawk (Jul 8, 2011)

"I hope you cold, heartless, mean trainers..."

LOL. You're calling me cold, heartless and mean, because I say the word "no"? Isn't that a bit heavy handed?

Just to be sure, we are talking about PO training here, which is a position very much to one extreme, as harsh physical corrections are to the other extreme. I would never roll or use a prong collar on my dog. 

I'm just advocating a measure of moderation when it comes to our relationships with these beings. I think it gives them some security for them to be told specifically what I won't accept, as well as what I would like them to do. And as stated in my post, I do agree that a bad trainer can mess up a dog, no matter what method they are using, PO or alpha rolls. I hope we don't end up with a world of anxious, hyper dogs, or fearful, cowering dogs too. Both of which can eventually turn into aggression if you leave them in that state long enough (obvious the latter produces more immediate aggression).

RH


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I like to do what gets me the results I want. A positive basis works best in my experience. People like Susan Garrett have great success with positive training...no confused or out of comtrol dogs with her, for sure. Most people can't do it though, so I am not sure how useful it is for those unable to apply positive training. It can work, cab result in high relability and and does not carry the fallout that corrections can. Thinking dogs come out of this tpe training. They learn to keep trying which is important for a competition dog. But, most folks do not need so much from their dogs. Many people in our culture have negative views of positive approaches, which is interesting in itself to me.

I do like a dog that can take pressure in obedience. I amnot sure what motivates positive trainers..some may be a philsophical reason. But, some might like the results they get. I am not anti-compulsion. I just don't often see it done well. I have one dog who actually does not look very good in obedience without some compulsion. He can take pressure and comes on stronger with drive. A German Shepherd as I feel they should be.

Does positive training put pressure and stress on the dog? It may do so in a way that I don't perceive or understand very well. I want my dog to stand up to challenge. I want pressure to bring on intensity. Does so much positive training emphasis result in a diffetent type of dog? I do understand the value of positive training. I build a huge bank account with a dog. Lots of positive foundation plus a mild form of compulsion in training.
The rules and communication system gets established. There are times when my male looks and performs better with compulsion than he does for reward. It is nice. You get a dog who is eaily trained and resilient when they are like this. My concern with positive training....what sort of dog gets produced in upcoming generations?


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Thanks Samba.

You brought the voice of reason back to this topic.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

I use operant conditioning, but prefer not to use negative reinforcement or positive punishment (ie physical corrections or manipulation/molding) in training. If I can train my dogs positively and not use any physical corrections why not? I don't see a reason to use intimidation or discomfort to train when there are other methods that work just as well (or even better for many things in my case) for my dogs and without any fallout. I've never had any dogs develop any issues or behavior problems related to clicker training or other positive training methods but I have with other methods, collar corrections, etc...


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I do understand this. I have seen shut down and other fallout from corrections. 

It is difficult to discuss on paper because my compulsion is perhaps not terribly conventional. So hard to see the picture of it. But, i have a dog who does not shut down but rather comes up in drive and power with the compulsion. I don 't know that I am intimidating him or hurting him though. It is pressure of a sort though. I have others who sour quickly under pressure. I hope people keep breeding me dogs like the former.
Without some pressure, how will we select for and know who is who. It reveals a lot about the dogs character. I don't think compulsion done well compromises a good dog. A lesser dog, much more susceptible to fallout. It is about the value of a type of GSD.

I have nothing against positive approaches. I prefer them in many situations. I just really like my dog for whom some compulsion creates a really nice performance without fallout.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Hunter Jack said:


> Interesting Selzer.
> I find the view you ascribe to those who use other or mixed methods is the problem with the PO people. To many PO's it's the *only* way. Their way or the highway. *Plus you make "the other way" sound cold, heartless, mean* and any other derogatory term you would like to add in there.
> 
> There may be some out there like that but most of us on this forum use clicker and treats but are not adverse to correction. Such as a short swift pull to focus attention towards or away from a behavior.
> If people don't want to do that fine but don't make us out to be cruel human beings mistreating our dogs.


Redhawk, I was just attempting a bit of humor in this nasty little thread, where I am accused of making the other side look mean, cruel, and heartless. Well, I got the name...


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Much dog training can best be done with positive methods. Many behavioral problems can be treated with positive methods. This is well known. Just because a dog does something someone does not want it to does not mean correction or punishment is the best route to go. Such methods are often confusing and unfair. They do not reflect a good understanding of how dogs learn. People so often want something to stop and will not take the time to teaxh the dog what is wanted. I see this very often in behaviors that many people see as a nusance such as barking, jumping up, surfing counters, etc. 
Save the dog the confusion, save the relationship...teach the dog rather than punish it.

Meeting aggression with corrections seldom works for pet owners and too often has unwanted results. 

All habits of daily living the dogs here are taught what is desired.

Myself, I use compulsion in a certan way for competition. There is a foundation for it in a training relationship for specific exercises or behaviors.


----------



## Management (Aug 1, 2011)

I couldn't agree more. Maybe it just has always seemed to me that the people reacting to unwanted behaviors are the same ones sitting back and letting it happen and expecting something different


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Samba said:


> I do understand this. I have seen shut down and other fallout from corrections.
> 
> It is difficult to discuss on paper because my compulsion is perhaps not terribly conventional. So hard to see the picture of it. But, i have a dog who does not shut down but rather comes up in drive and power with the compulsion. I don 't know that I am intimidating him or hurting him though. It is pressure of a sort though. I have others who sour quickly under pressure. I hope people keep breeding me dogs like the former.
> Without some pressure, how will we select for and know who is who. It reveals a lot about the dogs character. I don't think compulsion done well compromises a good dog. A lesser dog, much more susceptible to fallout. It is about the value of a type of GSD.
> ...


A very reasonable approach!

"Different strokes for different folks (dogs and/or behaviors)"!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

"...intimidation or discomfort... " - Is this what some folks equal with using a "correction" in training a dog?

Funny how one's word choice can make an approach sound, isn't it?

Imagine how intimidated and/or discomforted a real human child might feel if it's parents actually have the cruelty to tell him/her "NO" about something? Shame on the mean parents.

And think how especially mean a dog owners must be to insist on a reliable recall even to the point of using a terrible tug on the leash just to teach it that it MUST come no matter what when it is told to "Come". Unbelievablly mean owners! Heh! Heh!


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

codmaster said:


> "...intimidation or discomfort... " - Is this what some folks equal with using a "correction" in training a dog?


Yes, discomfort. If a correction was comfortable and pleasant, it wouldn't work. It is an aversive. If it is not aversive to the dog, it would not be a positive punisher/negative reinforcer. As far as intimidation, yes some people do use this in training.

As far as children, well operant conditioning works on them too but it doesn't mean you never say no to them. There is also a difference between saying 'no' to a dog and a child. A child can understand the context, and that you may be saying 'no' about what happened 2, 3, 5 minutes ago or you can say 'no you can't have that' or 'no don't touch that thing over there' but to a dog, 'no' is very confusing and does not give them much feedback or guidance.



codmaster said:


> And think how especially mean a dog owners must be to insist on a reliable recall even to the point of using a terrible tug on the leash just to teach it that it MUST come no matter what when it is told to "Come". Unbelievablly mean owners! Heh! Heh!


It is possible to get a very reliable recall without any tugging on the leash, or even using a leash at all so then why tug on the dog? If they're not coming when you call they are not reliably trained in the first place.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Management said:


> I couldn't agree more. Maybe it just has always seemed to me that the people reacting to unwanted behaviors are the same ones sitting back and letting it happen and expecting something different


The best time to stop a behavior - before it happens. Exactly. 

By the time I get to a point of correcting for a behavior that needs it - I am too late and have gotten behind the dog. 

So I can be a more positive (have not figured out purely positive) by being on top of things, anticipating and shaping, reinforcing so the dog learns to do things that I want them to do, repeatedly, and those become their go to behaviors. My dogs aren't confused by positives because they are getting feedback.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *codmaster*  
_"...intimidation or discomfort... " - Is this what some folks equal with using a "correction" in training a dog?_

Yes, discomfort. If a correction was comfortable and pleasant, it wouldn't work. *(But it does work if it is uncomfortable, right!)* It is an aversive. If it is not aversive to the dog, it would not be a positive punisher/negative reinforcer. As far as intimidation, yes some people do use this in training.

As far as children, well operant conditioning works on them too but it doesn't mean you never say no to them. There is also a difference between saying 'no' to a dog and a child. A child can understand the context, and that you may be saying 'no' about what happened 2, 3, 5 minutes ago or you can say 'no you can't have that' or 'no don't touch that thing over there' but to a dog, 'no' is very confusing and does not give them much feedback or guidance.

*So you really think that a 2yo child "understands" when you tell them "No", they can't do something or that they "have" to do something? Then of course, you can "reason" with a child and just explain to them why they can't stick their hand on a hot stove - good luck! And we can thus teach our dogs not to do something- i.e. counter surf by just ignoring the behavior or giving them the often described "Higher Value" reward (instead of just teaching them "No!" when they do something not acceptable (and tell them to do something else! Such as "No", "Sit".*



Quote:
Originally Posted by *codmaster*  
_And think how especially mean a dog owners must be to insist on a reliable recall even to the point of using a terrible tug on the leash just to teach it that it MUST come no matter what when it is told to "Come". Unbelievablly mean owners! Heh! Heh! _

It is possible to get a very reliable recall without any tugging on the leash, or *even using a leash at all (like to see this one! Unless you are referring to an e-collar here!)* so then why tug on the dog? If they're not coming when you call they are not reliably trained in the first place. *Don't we even need to teach them the command "Come" first? *
__________________


Are you saying that you would "intimidate" a child with saying "No" to a human child for some things (which?) but you would never "No" to a dog? *Interesting approach!*

*"to a dog, 'no' is very confusing and does not give them much feedback or guidance"*

*Perhaps you must not be teaching it very well to your dogs if you really believe this. *
*No, it is not confusing - "No" simply means stop what you are doing right this minute, and look at me and I will tell you something else to do. Would that be confusing to you? Very clear to me!*

*BTW, *"...intimidation ...." How does a proper correction - little tug on the leash or a verbal "No" for example, intimidate a dog? I guess that your dogs must be MUCH softer than any of the GSD's that I have ever owned as these "corrections" would certainly not intimidate any of them.

As I have said many times here - a good trainer will adapt his/her training approach to the individual dog and not be a fanatic for ANY approach as a "one size fits all"!

You have a nice day.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I do know of very reliable recalls without a leash....on whippets. I loaned the training info on that to my brother. I think that many of the people who reject the ida of how effective postitive training can be are not well acquainted with the training and how it is done. I own pinch collars and electric collars, have hard drivey dogs etc....and yet, I know that positive training can be highly reliable in many instances and am not skeptical of its results when well done. Go to seminars,dialogue with those using positive techniques and the success will speak for itself. I don't think most people are going to do it well or embrace it 100%. Most people spoil their pets too much to have success with positive methods. Most people are too permissive with their companion dogs to apply it well completely.


Here is Leslie's info on reliable recalls

http://www.dogwise.com/itemdetails.cfm?id=dtb810p


----------

