# Corrections does not equal brutality



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

I noticed that a lot of people have a misconception about corrections and that we all speak about something different. Some people think of a prong, electric collar or even hitting a dog. Others think of scruffing the neck, while I usually think of voice corrections when the word correction comes up. 


How do you utilize correction? When do you correct your dog and what do people usually think? 

I am a strong advocate for positive reinforcement yet I am open to correction but when the word correction falls, some people think I am brutal with my dogs. 

Correction is not equal to brutality. Brutality is abuse, plain and simple and corrections can lead to abuse. 

It's important to know where the line is drawn and that you know exactly what you are doing so we are not unfair to the dog.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

Correction does not always equal brutality but it can. I think a lot of people on this site are good about advocating fair and appropriate corrections. 

The problem is that a correction can mean anything from a simple "eh-eh" to hanging the dog. When someone says "correction" without explaining what they mean by it, then we are left to assume things. And you know what they say about when you assume.


----------



## ShenzisMom (Apr 27, 2010)

I do not think of anything specific when I hear a correction was used. A correction could be anything from a coming to jesus moment, a physical correction, a collar correction, a verbal correction, or anything in between. I automatically assume the correction used was fair and appropriate due to the specific situation.

With this in mind, NEVER correct the dog out of anger. If you are seeing red, or frustrated you have no business in dealing with the dog at that moment in time. If you are not willing to dish out a proportionate correction and keep level headed put the dog away and chill out. Don't bring the matter up later. If you do not correct in the necessary time frame(immediately) and with the appropriate level of correction, thats your fault and the matter is done.

I am a firm believer in positive training-with proofing. A tool is a tool is a tool. The way it is used either makes it a fair communication between the dog and handler or a form of force, unfair. No tool is useful without training.

Just rambling...referencing no one in particular.

EDIT:

I correct my dog for doing anything I do not want to see in the future. This may be a 'I'll show to the proper way' correction, or an actual correction depending on the scenario. People think I'm mean because I use a prong collar. The way I look at it is their dogs are poorly trained wild animals. They wouldn't know how to train 'sit' let alone anything else. So if I'm a little _mean _because I NEED my dog to be wellbehaved so their off leash poosykins can be an annoying ditz and not dinner, so be it.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

SWounds logical. Unlike what a lot of folks believe (like too many people in my local obedience club), a proper "correction" is NOT "Punishment".

A good correction is also given in proportion to the dog, and it's temperament and of course also what it is doing that needs to be changed. I.e. "correcting" a crooked sit is totally different than correcting a dog who is aggresively rushing innocent people when you are out walking.

And naturally before any correction we need to be sure that the dog actually understands what is requested of him/her.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

gsdraven said:


> Correction does not always equal brutality but it can. I think a lot of people on this site are good about advocating fair and appropriate corrections.
> 
> The problem is that a correction can mean anything from a simple "eh-eh" to hanging the dog. When someone says "correction" without explaining what they mean by it, then we are left to assume things. And you know what they say about when you assume.


That is exactly what I am thinking too. Whenever we talk about correction, it's not the worst idea to actually specify so we know what exactly we are talking about.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

I believe that Mrs.K's last statement about "fairness" is most important. If a correction is fair to the dog then it is not abusive. 

Quote by Mrs.K:
"Correction is not equal to brutality. Brutality is abuse, plain and simple and corrections can lead to abuse."
I do not really understand your use of the word "brutality". Could you please explain what you mean by this?


----------



## Holmeshx2 (Apr 25, 2010)

I agree that corrections can go either way and to NEVER correct when you are angry. I have to admit that there are times I have been guilty of being "inconsistent" with Jinx but it is because I try to be fair leader first. While it does not happen often there are times she just hits a nerve and I would rather not punish/correct her at all then to unfairly correct her or do too harsh or one given while angry. I have posted on this before where if people feel they are correcting their dog a few times throughout the day and getting frustrated to think outside the dogs behavior and it's probably the owners fault. Like the wonderful time Jinx woke up and came running full speed out of the bedroom and LEAPED onto my coffee table throwing my breakfast laptop and a few other things across the room and sat there wagging her tail with the happiest look on her face like "TA-DA here I am!!" I didn't even say a word to her just grabbed her backpack and off to the woods for a hike we went. When I got home I cleaned up the mess and she was great but the day before she didn't get a walk and it was pent up energy. Was it good to let her think the behavior was ok by not saying anything? Probably not however she has never jumped on the table again it was not a normal behavior just one from my lack of giving her everything she needs which at this age is a ton of exercise.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> I believe that Mrs.K's last statement about "fairness" is most important. If a correction is fair to the dog then it is not abusive.
> 
> Quote by Mrs.K:
> "Correction is not equal to brutality. Brutality is abuse, plain and simple and corrections can lead to abuse."
> I do not really understand your use of the word "brutality". Could you please explain what you mean by this?



Brutality to me is hitting a dog so hard that he would shy away from his handler, or putting the e-collar on the highest level just to pay the dog back. To hang a dog on a prong collar, picking him up on his ears, kicking him in his stomach. 

People may call that correction but that is brutal and abusive. 

While correction, for most of us, is not anywhere near brutal it can lead down the abusive road if we don't watch what we are doing. 

I am pretty sure that we all had our moments where we've been unfair to the dog (if we are true to ourselves) and most of the time it's because we don't know it any better. At least that is what I've typically seen with a lot of people. They didn't know how to respond so they responded with the only thing they knew and that was to hit the dog, yang the prong or kick them in the butt.


----------



## Dr. Teeth (Mar 10, 2011)

Is this really a major concern? Some owners may use extreme tactics out of ignorance, but they will never get good training results if they do. 

If you are talking about defending your own "corrections", just know what you are doing and why.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

So it is brutal if a dog shies away from the handler from a hit, but is it brutal if the dog shies away because of a firm verbal "No!"? Doing anything "just to pay a dog back" is unfair to a dog. For instance if the dog peed on your carpet and you did not pet him the rest of the day this is not fair, but is it still brutal? When you say "hang a dog on the prong" what does that mean? For instance if the dog is trying to bite you and you lift him off the ground to regain control is this brutal? I have never seen anyone lift a dog by the ears except president LBJ and he wasn't correcting the dog. So a kick to the stomach is brutal and abusive, how about a kick elsewhere on the dog? Or is using your foot in itself brutal? 
I take exception to your idea that corrections lead to abuse; that whole notion is simply absurd.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

While I don't think that a dog shying away from a handler because of a firm verbal "No" is brutal, I do think that what is over the top for a dog needs to be taken into consideration. 

If you yelled at Jax, she would probably hit the deck and hide. If you hit her, she would lay there and cower. There's a reason I've never even considered attempting SchH with her. 

Art, don't you think you have to take into consideration the dogs tolerance level, "toughness" and personality when correcting?

Yes, a kick to the stomach with intent of harming it brutal and abusive. But I've kicked Jax in her rear and before. Can't remember why but it was to get her attention and i wasn't abusing her. There are so many factors in what is brutal and abusive (outside of the obvious ass beating his dogs for kicks and giggles) that I don't see how it can be fairly equated in a general manner.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Thank you Jax! At least someone around here has some common sense. Of course it depends on the dog and the individual circumstance. That is why I hate it when people start talking about something as abusive. 
What might be "abusive" in one circumstance or with a particular dog can also be exactly what is necessary in another circumstance with a different dog.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

Since Mrs K seemed to be advocating for corrections, I don't *think* her position was that all corrections lead to abuse.

Like Jax08 said, you need to tailor the correction to the dog. If your firm verbal correction sends the dog cowering yet you continue to "correct" at that level, then yes, you are abusing the dog (or at least abusing your power over the dog).


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

I agree that most people misconceive what we really mean when we "correct".

The most correction I will give is a collar pop (prong if it's on him, otherwise flat to get his attention) or a verbal correction- "Ah Ah", "No"


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> So it is brutal if a dog shies away from the handler from a hit, but is it brutal if the dog shies away because of a firm verbal "No!"? Doing anything "just to pay a dog back" is unfair to a dog. For instance if the dog peed on your carpet and you did not pet him the rest of the day this is not fair, but is it still brutal? When you say "hang a dog on the prong" what does that mean? For instance if the dog is trying to bite you and you lift him off the ground to regain control is this brutal? I have never seen anyone lift a dog by the ears except president LBJ and he wasn't correcting the dog. So a kick to the stomach is brutal and abusive, how about a kick elsewhere on the dog? Or is using your foot in itself brutal?
> I take exception to your idea that corrections lead to abuse; that whole notion is simply absurd.



Oh Jeez, come on Zahnburg, do we really have to go int the tiniest little detail and semantics? It doesn't matter where you kick a dog, it's not right when you do it just because he didn't down or sit or in a training session. But if a dog would be attacking my dogs, you can be rest assured I'd kick him off my dogs, and I've done it before. 

Does that give you an answer? 




> Since Mrs K seemed to be advocating for corrections, I don't *think* her position was that all corrections lead to abuse.
> 
> Like Jax08 said, you need to tailor the correction to the dog. If your firm verbal correction sends the dog cowering yet you continue to "correct" at that level, then yes, you are abusing the dog (or at least abusing your power over the dog).


Yes, thank you. It needs to be tailored towards the dog. With my dogs I usually never use more than a voice correction or a pop on the collar. 

I am always advocating positive re-inforcment but I do not close my eyes from corrections. Not everything is brutal, what is brutal to one dog may not be brutal to another. 

Sometimes kicking a dog is necessary (like when a dog is going after your dog or after you) but if you repeatedly kick a dog so much that he's bruised all over his body it's brutal. 

The same goes for hanging a dog on his prong. If you have to lift a dog up to get him off of you it's necessary but if you do it out of anger and because you don't know it any better, in a training session, because the dog didn't sit right away, it's brutal. 

Zahnburg, I do have common sense, thank you very much implying I don't...


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Dr. Teeth said:


> Is this really a major concern? Some owners may use extreme tactics out of ignorance, but they will never get good training results if they do.
> 
> If you are talking about defending your own "corrections", just know what you are doing and why.


Anyone who has been around the competitive dog "business" long, has, I would bet, seen some really awful training. This is not special to schutzhund. Professional pet dog trainers, gun dog trainers, even conformation people.
And if you think that you can't still get that "happy" watch the handler and wag the tail look as the finished product, you are mistaken.

The most important thing is to be fair and clear.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

You come on Mrs.K! You start these topics talking about "brutality" and "abuse" in regards to correcting a dog. A correction is only as "brutal" as a dog perceives it to be; if you kick a dog and he is there still wagging his tail then obviously he did not find it "brutal"; on the other hand if you tell a dog "No!" and he runs and hides then obviously he found that to be rather "brutal". 
The problem is that people who don't know any better simply look at the actions of the handler and fail to notice the reaction of the dog.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> You come on Mrs.K! You start these topics talking about "brutality" and "abuse" in regards to correcting a dog. A correction is only as "brutal" as a dog perceives it to be; if you kick a dog and he is there still wagging his tail then obviously he did not find it "brutal"; on the other hand if you tell a dog "No!" and he runs and hides then obviously he found that to be rather "brutal".
> The problem is that people who don't know any better simply look at the actions of the handler and fail to notice the reaction of the dog.



Zahnburg, the reason I opened the topic was to say that not all corrections are abusive or brutal. Maybe you should have read a little closer. 

Because anytime people talk about corrections it's perceived as brutal or abuse but not every correction is! 

For crying out loud, don't lay words into my mouth I haven't said. 

And yes, I do agree with you and I just said it before, it all depends on the dog but there is a point where it can turn into abuse. Just because your dog can take it, doesn't mean you can hit him repeatedly with a shovel.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Art - in your experience, how does the intensity of the correction correlate to the intensity of the drive. If a firm No will shake a dog, does yelling have any affect if they are in drive? IME, I could scream until the cows come home when Jax is in her high prey drive 'let's catch the birdie" mode and it makes no difference but a low stim with an e-collar will work.

So, along with the dog, it also depends on where the dog's mindset is at that particular time.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> Art - in your experience, how does the intensity of the correction correlate to the intensity of the drive. If a firm No will shake a dog, does yelling have any affect if they are in drive? IME, I could scream until the cows come home when Jax is in her high prey drive 'let's catch the birdie" mode and it makes no difference but a low stim with an e-collar will work.
> 
> So, along with the dog, it also depends on where the dog's mindset is at that particular time.


Agreed.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

I read what you wrote quite carefully, obviously you have not. You say one thing in one breath ("corrections do not equal brutality") and then contradict your self in the next ("[corrections] can lead down the abusive road if we don't watch what we are doing."). 
Corrections when applied fairly and effectively are never abusive. If they are not fair and effective then that is simply bad training and bad training tends to be abusive in general whether a person is using a clicker or an e-collar.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> I read what you wrote quite carefully, obviously you have not. You say one thing in one breath ("corrections do not equal brutality") and then contradict your self in the next ("[corrections] can lead down the abusive road if we don't watch what we are doing.").
> Corrections when applied fairly and effectively are never abusive. If they are not fair and effective then that is simply bad training and bad training tends to be abusive in general whether a person is using a clicker or an e-collar.


yeah, right, use my lack of language against me because that is what you are doing right now. Because I've been trying to tell you for three frickin times already that we are talking about the same **** thing.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> So, along with the dog, it also depends on where the dog's mindset is at that particular time.


Of course.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

This is actually a great topic. Thanks for posting. 

I am a bit of a sissy when it comes to correcting my dogs, but they rarely need anything more than a change in tone. I agree that you have to cater a correction to the dog. If a dog has been conditioned to hear a certain amount of exasperation in the voice before he responds, then it makes no sense to continue to give him three totally useless chances to get it right. But that does not mean to start with the exasperated, angry, forceful command either. It means stopping the foolishness. No one needs to tell a dog four times to do something, tell them once, then go and help them. 

STAY. If the dog breaks the stay, collect the dog, reposition it, and command STAY again. This time do not be so far away or for so long -- back up in training. It is a correction, a correction without jerks and angry yelling. Putting a dog back where they were and starting over IS a correction. 

Leash pop, prong collars, e-collars, etc. can be corrections and training aids for some dogs, and abuse/unnecessary use of force for other dogs. 

I think what leads to abuse, the unnecessary use of force often accompanied by charged emotions, is misconceptions about the psychology of the dog. I like to think the dog wants to please me, and this makes my approach to training different, but I suppose that it could also lead to abuse if the dog chooses to displease you. Because a dog cannot choose to please you, if he cannot also choose to displease you. So, you have an unrealistic expectation for the dog or have humanized the dog, and when it displeases you, your are hurt or angry, and that can lead to sanctions and even to abuse.

But there are other attitudes we have about dogs, if I had a nickel for every time I hear, "he is stubborn" or "she is defiant." I think that we put human characteristics on the dog, and then punish them for them. Some dogs learn a thing more readily than others, that does not make the others stubborn. Some dogs learn things in different ways. If the dog is not learning something readily one way, maybe try a different approach. A good trainer can assess the dog, assess the owner, and try a method appropriate to both. They can also assess when it is not working and can try something else.

And then there are the dominant dog people. Yes there are dominant dogs, there are independent dogs. There are submissive dogs. There are biddable dogs. Sometimes it seems like people label all dogs with training issue that also display ANY perceived symptoms of aggression, as dominant dogs. They immediately jump to Ceasar Millan, or NILIF, and for the rest of the dog's life act like a prison guard, five years later still telling everyone who will listen how dominant the dog is, and how he has to give firm corrections and bark clipped commands. Poor dog. 

And then there are shy dogs and some of their people can be pretty co-dependent.

And then there are the rescue dogs. "Oh we rescued him. Yes, he was abused. We are not even going to try to get him to stop growling at all men, or to learn to potty outside, or to come when we call, or to take a treat gently because we can only imagine what he has been through." These _nice _people are almost more criminal than the original owner who dumped and perhaps abused their dog.

Each person has a different view of corrections, and not necessarily the best one for their individual dog. And NO correction is no better. I think the worst thing a person can do is no discipline at all. But, redirecting a land shark from hand to toy _is _a correction. Running the hand down the back and pressing on the waist _is _a correction. Telling a dog to LOOK or WATCH to regain focus may be a correction. 

I think there is nothing wrong with giving one type of correction the old college try, but if you get no improvement, that way, a correction to your system of corrections is necessary.

I think I am rambling.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

selzer said:


> This is actually a great topic. Thanks for posting.
> 
> I am a bit of a sissy when it comes to correcting my dogs, but they rarely need anything more than a change in tone. I agree that you have to cater a correction to the dog. If a dog has been conditioned to hear a certain amount of exasperation in the voice before he responds, then it makes no sense to continue to give him three totally useless chances to get it right. But that does not mean to start with the exasperated, angry, forceful command either. It means stopping the foolishness. No one needs to tell a dog four times to do something, tell them once, then go and help them.
> 
> ...


Actually, you are dead on. :thumbup:


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mrs.K said:


> yeah, right, use my lack of language against me because that is what you are doing right now. Because I've been trying to tell you for three frickin times already that we are talking about the same **** thing.


Mrs. K, do you really have to include terms like "frickin" in your statements. Not everyone is going to agree with you and some are going to be down right hostile. Right now they have your goat and your angry reply is egging them on. They feel real good. Try ignoring it. Most of the people here read your post and did not think that you were saying that corrections are all bad and going to lead to abuse. But when you add the explicatives to your post it does not help your point, and it does not lead to the blissful Stepford wives atmosphere that we are supposed to achieve here. And it is a family friendly site. 

Much better to say something like, "your right, I am so sorry that I cannot manage to respond to you in words and phrases that you can understand."


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I also agree that a 'correction' needs to be tailored to the individual dog and the infraction.

As Sue said, if my dog decides to get up from a "stay" position, I'm just going to replace them in that position. 

If I yell "KNOCK IT OFF", my aussie is going to hit the deck and turn into a marshmellow, while Masi is going to have the attitude "ok no big deal I'll move on". 

I don't really have to "correct" my dogs physically as in brutally, they just don't really do anything that would warrant it, but if they did (as in bite someone say), they are going to get the wrath of me on them. No I'm not going to kick their butts (literally), but they are going to be in big dog doo. 

Being fair, not being blind to your own dogs misgivings, and correcting appropriately for the infraction doesn't have to be brutal but I do believe in correcting when necessary and again, the correction may just be my 'words & tone', or it may not.


----------



## Sunstreaked (Oct 26, 2010)

I admit to being a bit at a loss regarding "corrections". 

We have a situation where Eva, 9 months, will come 90% on recall, but then ignore during the other 10%. When she ignores, I honestly don't know what to do (she's actually down a very steep bank swimming when this happens - the only time it does happen - and I can't get her without taking the chance of falling in myself). When she comes back up, she is put back on leash for "not listening". If she listens, she gets verbal and treat reward. Other than voice, I don't know what to do and what "correction" she needs. 

I would like to correct it - somehow - so she can continue to play, but I just don't know what to do.


----------



## elisabeth_00117 (May 17, 2009)

Before I give a correction I quickly (like in a milisecond) ask myself these questions:

1. Have I taught the command properly? 

2. Does the dog understand the command? 

3. What can I do to help the dog understand what is being asked? 

4. Have I proofed the command/task? 

5. Did I communicate the command/task properly?

I think if those things can all be answered with a "yes" then a correction is warrented.

I also think that a correction should be given with the same strength the behaviour is happening.

Ex.1. Dog is heeling during an obedience session, looks away continuiously, a leash pop is given to get the dogs attention.

Ex.2. Dog is in protection and is not releasing the sleeve/tug/pillow/what-have-you, he is high in drive and not listening at all to any commands, a good prong correction or e-collar correction is needed to match the stimulation the dog has inorder to "bring the dog back". Not sure if this is a good enough explination but hopefully my point came across correctly.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Have you tried a long light leash or maybe an e-collar?

Once you call them and cannot enforce the come - it can escalate as they learn they don't have to come.

Maybe one of the folks on this forum who say that they have a 100% recall will chime in with how they achieved this.

BTW, good that you don't correct when she eventually comes!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

elisabeth_00117 said:


> Before I give a correction I quickly (like in a milisecond) ask myself these questions:
> 
> 1. Have I taught the command properly?
> 
> ...


A GREAT explanation of what to do!

Sometimes hard to maintain our cool when they flat out ignore a command, but very necessary!


----------



## G-burg (Nov 10, 2002)

> Each person has a different view of corrections


So true!

And what I've seen over the years in regards to what handlers have done to there dogs... I would say some of the stuff is down right abusive..

I also love how people justify what they do to there dogs in the name of training... BUT, to each there own..


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

G-burg said:


> So true!
> 
> And what I've seen over the years in regards to what handlers have done to there dogs... I would say some of the stuff is down right abusive..
> 
> I also love how people justify what they do to there dogs in the name of training... BUT, to each there own..


So what kind of corrections would you use?


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

codmaster said:


> Have you tried a long light leash or maybe an e-collar?
> 
> Once you call them and cannot enforce the come - it can escalate as they learn they don't have to come.
> 
> ...



You know, I am not even sure if there is such a thing as a 100% re-call. 

I've seen it with world-competition dogs. Once they saw that rabbit running, there was nothing that held them back and I will never forget the agility champion. I'd go as far that she was trained a 150% but that one day, she ran on the street, not listening to anybody, got run over by a car and killed. 

I'd say there is a 99% re-call but never a 100% recall because afterall they are dogs and it doesn't matter how much or how good they are trained, they are living, breathing beings and still have a mind of their own. 

There will always be that one time where a dog runs off and won't listen.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

G-burg said:


> So true!
> 
> And what I've seen over the years in regards to what handlers have done to there dogs... I would say some of the stuff is down right abusive..
> 
> I also love how people justify what they do to there dogs in the name of training... BUT, to each there own..


But isn't it important to step up to the plate when there is obvious abuse and say something?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Codmaster is just digging on me because I said I have NEVER had to correct for recall. They come to me, they come if I have toenail clippers or ear ointment in my hand. Arwen was in full flight after a rabbit she kicked up and I called and she practically braked in mid-air and came back to a heel. 

I am not a wonderful trainer, but I have had most of them since birth, and they come. They always do. It is just not a problem I have ever had. I NEVER call them to me to correct them for something.

I just never have a problem with them coming to me. They aren't robots but I guess good things happen when their Susie calls them because that is just something they listen to. 

Codmaster on the other hand talks about a jerk on the prong collar if the dog doesn't come, I have never had to resort to that tactic. My dogs come. So they are not afraid of something bad happening, it never has been an issue. 

Maybe I am just more interesting to them then whatever they are doing. Maybe they respect that command. 

Even my boys would come when my girls were in standing heat and one of them was sniffing at her through the kennel, with her flagging away. I could call him, and he would reluctantly move himself back to me and into his own kennel. Two different dogs, different lines, both were fine about that. 

I do not claim 100% recall. Just that I have never had a problem with it, and have never had to correct for it. For example, if Odessa who I have had for five months, and have not put through any training yet, if I called her Odessa Come! And she did not, well shame on me for giving her a command that I neither taught her nor could enforce. But she does come when I call, so it is not a problem.

Other than Odessa, I am sure that every one of them has had a long line affixed and told to stay or wait while I crossed the room, and then I would call, and they would come -- last night Bear overshot, but turned back and was into me immediately. But they have been coming to me at home since forever. It is just not a question, I call, they come. 

If I had dogs fighting, I would not call, though I think I have avoided a few fights by a timely recall and quick actions.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mrs.K said:


> But isn't it important to step up to the plate when there is obvious abuse and say something?


What is obvious abuse?

To me, keeping a puppy in a crate for nine hours during the day is obvious abuse. Others do not see it that way. 

To me putting a prong collar on a puppy is obvious abuse. Others do not see it that way.

Leaving a dog in an outside kennel while you go to work is obvious abuse to some people. Others do not see it that way. 

Chaining a dog is obvious abuse to some people. Others do not see it that way. 

Kicking, punching, burning the dog is obvious abuse. Can we agree on that?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> *Codmaster is just digging on me because I said I have NEVER had to correct for recall.* They come to me, they come if I have toenail clippers or ear ointment in my hand. Arwen was in full flight after a rabbit she kicked up and I called and she practically braked in mid-air and came back to a heel.
> 
> I am not a wonderful trainer, but I have had most of them since birth, and they come. *They always do.* It is just not a problem I have ever had. I NEVER call them to me to correct them for something.
> 
> ...


Selzer, I would hope that you can calm down and not assume that I was referring to you. . I actually was not even thinking of you. 

Do you claim to have a 100% recall with all your dogs? That is great and a great tribute to your training! I thought that perhaps you meant 100% when you said "*They always do.".*

So you don't like a prong collar, either. To each his/her own. They have been a very good tool for a lot of people when properly fitted and properly used. I have seen many cases wher small people with great big dogs have had great success with switching from a regular choke collar to a prong. And many people are surprised to learn that a prong collar is actually much easier on a dog than the regular choke collar. 
Forgive me if I am wrong about this, but my guess would be that you probably don't use a choke collar either ,just from what you said.

BTW, did I actually say a "jerk" on the leash? 

I thought that I mentioned a "correction" - could also be a verbal correction even when a dog has a prong collar on. I use this all the time with my dog


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Nope sorry, it was DR89 that said a sharp No and and a jerk on the prong collar. 

I have prong collars, I just don't use them. I do think it is a bit much on a puppy. After Bear's class last night, she does not know how close she is coming to being given the prong collar treatment. But the thing is, I do not train enough, and I know that. I should have her little butt out there every day, walking, and heeling, and sitting and staying. I think I can do more with her now that it has dried up a little. But I do not feel it is fair to use extra force, power steering on a dog, if I did not do my part first. The other thing is that what it is is play. She rolls over and mouthes my hand, and wiggles and wants to play in class. I have no desire to force this puppy to mind. She is EASY to manage at home. She is not showing any signs of inappropriate aggression. I could put a prong collar on her and see a 180 degree change in behavior. I am not sure I really want that. 

If you have a dog with a strong personality that is constantly pushing the envelope and you are a rather weak leader, than a prong collar can improve your control of the dog without fighting with the dog, which should NEVER happen. Leaders do not fight, they lead by being the resource manager, by upright position, by confidence. I think sometimes all we really need to do is step out with confidence and our dogs will amaze us. But if there is a constant struggle to get the dog to do what you want, even if that is not pulling on the lead, then a prong collar can help, and would rather see that than people being too permissive, and putting the dog in a mentally challenging state, always wandering what he should do.

But before I put the power steering on Bear, I am going to get out there and do a bit more training. I had Bear to the point of getting her CGC seven months ago, but I sold her and the people did NOTHING with her for five months. I got her back and a month later got her back into classes. 

Bear is a fifteen month old teenager who would probably straighten up and fly right if I put a prong on her. She is confident, playful, crazy, and strong as an ox, I guess I would rather train her into some good behaviors, than break her of some bad habits. I missed some time with her and her sister, Dolly, but I do not need to catch up. I am not in a hurry. So I guess it might take longer because of the missed time, to get them where I want them. But I really do not need to go with a short cut yet. 

I do not train with chokers, but occasionally I will show with one -- no leash pops allowed in the ring, so it is simply an no-slip collar. Normally I use my leather martingale to show with, but if it is not handy there is a leash with a choke chain in the car. Their collars have tags on them and have to be removed prior to going in the ring.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

I think that some people tend to over correct a problem (by use of aids) instead of attempting to understand why the dog doesn't comply.


----------



## clearcreekranch (Mar 18, 2010)

Sunstreaked said:


> I admit to being a bit at a loss regarding "corrections".
> 
> We have a situation where Eva, 9 months, will come 90% on recall, but then ignore during the other 10%. When she ignores, I honestly don't know what to do (she's actually down a very steep bank swimming when this happens - the only time it does happen - and I can't get her without taking the chance of falling in myself). When she comes back up, she is put back on leash for "not listening". If she listens, she gets verbal and treat reward. Other than voice, I don't know what to do and what "correction" she needs.
> 
> I would like to correct it - somehow - so she can continue to play, but I just don't know what to do.


Go to Leerburg site and read his philosophy of dog training and his article on corrections. May help.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> But isn't it important to step up to the plate when there is obvious abuse and say something?


Unless the dog is in obvious and imminent danger of severe physical injury or death, then perhaps it would be advisable to heed Mr. Williams' timeless advice:


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

selzer said:


> What is obvious abuse?
> 
> To me, keeping a puppy in a crate for nine hours during the day is obvious abuse. Others do not see it that way.
> 
> ...


Actually, everythng you stated I agree with and I will open my mouth and speak my mind. Especially on the crate thingy... and if somebody has to put a prong on a puppy he should go and get a different breed.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> and I will open my mouth and speak my mind.


Have you ever considered that if you spent as much time training your own dogs as you do opening your mouth on the computer, you might have a bit more success with your dogs??


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> Have you ever considered that if you spent as much time training your own dogs as you do opening your mouth on the computer, you might have a bit more success with your dogs??


And why don't you eat your own advise and mind your own business. 

You talk about me opening my mouth? What about you? You don't leave any opportunity judging people...

And just for the record, my bitch is pretty darn successful in what she does.


----------



## Linzi (Mar 23, 2010)

Zahnburg said:


> Have you ever considered that if you spent as much time training your own dogs as you do opening your mouth on the computer, you might have a bit more success with your dogs??


What a rude man!!!!,you seem very defensive about the topic,i wonder why??


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Actually that is Hank's advice. 
As for me judging, I don't think so. I will, on occasion, offer honest advice/opinion, but I have never posted videos of someone's BH routine or the like so that I can type about how horrible it is. 
And what does your bitch do? I have a dog that likes to eat **** and she is pretty good at it, but it is not something that I brag about.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> Actually that is Hank's advice.
> As for me judging, I don't think so. I will, on occasion, offer honest advice/opinion, but I have never posted videos of someone's BH routine or the like so that I can type about how horrible it is.
> And what does your bitch do? I have a dog that likes to eat **** and she is pretty good at it, but it is not something that I brag about.



Oh well, Zahnburg, I don't have to justify myself in front of you.... I know what my dog is doing and capable off and that is all that matters and if you want to know. Just follow the link in my signature... and you'll find out.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> Actually, everythng you stated I agree with and I will open my mouth and speak my mind. Especially on the crate thingy... and if somebody has to put a prong on a *puppy* he should go and get a different breed.


Just curious - what age would you consider to be a puppy in the GSD breed?


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Linzi said:


> What a rude man!!!!,you seem very defensive about the topic,i wonder why??


Rude? I don't think so. I will say that it bothers me when a person adopts a "holier than thou" attitude when she has not accomplished anything other than being born the daughter of a successful breeder. My father is a pilot, but I can guarentee that you do not want to get in a plane if I am sitting at the controls.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> Rude? I don't think so. I will say that it bothers me when a person adopts a "holier than thou" attitude when she has not accomplished anything other than being born the daughter of a successful breeder. My father is a pilot, but I can guarentee that you do not want to get in a plane if I am sitting at the controls.


Zahnburg, you know nothing about me or my dogs. Have you met any of my dogs personally? No? So STOP JUDGING ME!
I don't need a frickin trial to proof what I know or don't know. I don't have to justify anything I say or do to you or anyone else. I have my experience and nobody can take that away from me. 

I am going my own way and not what anyone wants me to do or go for. I chose my own venue, something I have passion for and we are good at what we do. If you don't like me, why don't you put me on your ignore list instead of constantly attacking me for being who I am. 

I can't help it that I am the daughter of my parents. I am grateful for what I have learned and without that knowledge I couldn't train my dogs without any obedience trainer at all. We may take a little longer because I have no one who is watching me but if I didn't know what I was doing I couldn't teach my dog to retrieve, I couldn't teach her to heel, sit, down or to vorraus. And I couldn't teach a dog to track either. 

It's in our blood. All three of us have that gift from growing up the way we did. I train dogs for fun and to work and not to trial. 

And just for the record. I am a member of a Search and Rescue K9 Team training towards our first certification. My dog doesn't eat ****, she's actually working. I don't have any desire to compete in a sport.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mrs.K said:


> Actually, everythng you stated I agree with and I will open my mouth and speak my mind. Especially on the crate thingy... and if somebody has to put a prong on a puppy he should go and get a different breed.


Well, I am guilty, my dogs are kept in outdoor kennels while I am out and about or gone to work. Sometimes my work day includes 3 or 4 hours of driving, so it can be quite lengthy. 

I think that if I had just one dog, then leaving them all alone outside or inside for as many hours as I sometimes must, it might be somewhat abusive. But with the other dogs out there, they are perfectly fine and in some ways more comfortable than they would be in the house.

My point is that there are different opinions on what is abusive. Every single time when I see someone acting harshly to the child or dog, I have to wonder whether or not that is truly abusive, or just discipline. I might not approve, but I have no kids and well, until you have kids, you can be pretty idealistic on how to rear them. I haven't made comments or called the authorities yet, except the little toddler playing in the road with no adult around -- but that might have been neglect, not necessarily abuse. I felt she was not safe and called because I had no idea where the person responsible was. You never know, someone could have passed out or had a siezure, or heart attack or something. It does not have to be neglect or abuse, but it is unsafe so call.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Yes, but your outdoor kennel is not one of those tiny small crappy, dirty stinking kennels and your dogs have access to the family, they are loved and worked, exercised and mentally stimulated. So that is not abuse. 

As abuse I consider a dog that does nothing but sitting outdoor, in a small kennel, in his own pee and poop, dirty water and isn't fed on a daily basis, not groomed, full of flees and ticks and other parasites. You know, one of those really poor creatures that are forgotten and abandoned. 

I am not generalizing dog owners that keep their dogs outside.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> Zahnburg, you know nothing about me or my dogs. Have you met any of my dogs personally? No? So STOP JUDGING ME!
> I don't need a frickin trial to proof what I know or don't know. I don't have to justify anything I say or do to you or anyone else. I have my experience and nobody can take that away from me.
> 
> I am going my own way and not what anyone wants me to do or go for. I chose my own venue, something I have passion for and we are good at what we do. If you don't like me, why don't you put me on your ignore list instead of constantly attacking me for being who I am.
> ...


 No, I have never met you or your dogs in person, thus I base my opinion of you from what you have said on this forum, which is quite a bit.
I am not "constantly attacking" you, and, most assuredly, I would never attack anyone for being "themselves". Occasionally I will post my opinion which usually differs from yours. Additionally, I would never put you on an "ignore list" as you are much too fun. 
No, you do not choose your parents, and I am sure that you were exposed to a lot of training in your youth through them. However, at some point in your life it is necessary to cut the umbilical cord and stand on your own. One should not confuse their parents accomplishments for their own. 
I already know what you are doing with SAR and that you have no interest in sport. One gathers that through your numerous previous posts. Though I will say that it sounds like yet another venture which you will not see through, and most certainly it will be someone elses fault.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> Actually, everythng you stated I agree with and I will open my mouth and speak my mind. Especially on the crate thingy... *and if somebody has to put a prong on a puppy he should go and get a different breed.*


Why? Why is it ok to put a prong collar on a puppy of a different breed? Do different breeds respond differently to compulsion training as puppies?


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Zahnburg said:


> No, I have never met you or your dogs in person, thus I base my opinion of you from what you have said on this forum, which is quite a bit.
> I am not "constantly attacking" you, and, most assuredly, I would never attack anyone for being "themselves". Occasionally I will post my opinion which usually differs from yours. Additionally, I would never put you on an "ignore list" as you are much too fun.
> No, you do not choose your parents, and I am sure that you were exposed to a lot of training in your youth through them. However, at some point in your life it is necessary to cut the umbilical cord and stand on your own. One should not confuse their parents accomplishments for their own.
> I already know what you are doing with SAR and that you have no interest in sport. One gathers that through your numerous previous posts. Though I will say that it sounds like yet another venture which you will not see through, and most certainly it will be someone elses fault.


You don't know me then and if you wouldn't constantly bring up where i am from over and over and over again there wouldn't be talk about my parents anymore, in case you haven't noticed! 

So would you please quit bringing them up, please? 
I have never confused my parents accomplishments with my own and I have never claimed any of their accomplishments. As a matter of a fact I will never be anywhere near my fathers accomplishments. 

And yet again you are judging. Saying I'd quit SAR without knowing me personally.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> Why? Why is it ok to put a prong collar on a puppy of a different breed? Do different breeds respond differently to compulsion training as puppies?


No, it's not okay. You've misread what I said. If they have to put a pron on a puppy than they should get a different breed that they can handle without a prong. That was what I ment.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

If you end up with a dog who is finding lost children I will be amazed.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

ENOUGH of this personal back and forth bickering. It serves no purpose other than getting you both a warning. Either get back on topic or you will get a time out. 

Thank you,

ADMIN Lisa

*****


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

** comment removed by Admin. Please see my warning. **


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

** comment removed by Admin**


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

And that warning includes any responses and having to get in the last word in this argument. 

Get back on topic, *NOW*.

ADMIN Lisa


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

What was the topic again?


----------

