# Shelters/Rescues Against Correcting Dogs



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

I have been involved with fostering and volunteering with shelters for several years now,and noticed that quite a few of them seem to be against correcting the behavior in dogs without baiting them with treats. I personally only use verbal and physical praise when training my dogs and any fosters that come in.I have also used a Martingale and sometimes a Prong collar on a few dogs that needed it. I realize that all tools don't work for all dogs,but it's just surprising to see how many shelter staff seem to frown down upon correcting a dog or not using treats. It's like they feel as if you can't be a dog lover if you don't let the dog get away with murder. I know that a lot of these animals come from bad situations,but it still doesn't excuse bad behavior. I've actually had some staff members become defensive when I've pointed out behaviors some dogs exhibited that could be a problem down the road. For example there was a 9 month old black German Shepherd at a shelter a few months ago who snapped at a few individuals that walked past him in the lobby. This dog was a favorite of the staff and they actually said that he was 'just playing' when he did this. A few days later this dog was rescued and sent to Upstate New York. I still wonder if they moved him so quickly because they knew that he had issues and didn't want to be held liable. 

I'm not saying everyone who comes to the shelter should be allowed to just put a tool on a dog and use it blindly. Nor am I saying that ALL SHELTERS are this way. A lot of the ones I have dealt with though seem to have at least a few staff members who are against any type of discipline which is not helping the dog. 

I just wanted some opinions on whether or not you use any type of training collar on foster dogs?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I agree completly and see the same thing here where I live with the shelter that I volunteer at. Of course it isn't really unexpected as the local OB club generally feels the same way.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

When you can do this - (click the above link/watch video) why use a correction collar?

That said - yes I've recommended and used Prongs and also a Canny Collar on fosters.
I think dogs in shelters/rescues have so much stress going on anyway that it's difficult to think of adding more in the form of physical corrections. We are very against any physical corrections for any dog - for one thing, you do that to the right dog and it'll get you bitten - and you won't know if the dog will bite until you push that envelope. Especially on an adult dog. Furthermore, if a dog has been abused in any form, what's a "tap on the nose" (love that phrase  ) or a "swat on the butt" going to do to it?



> For example there was a 9 month old black German Shepherd at a shelter a few months ago who snapped at a few individuals that walked past him in the lobby.


This puppy does belong in a rescue with full disclosure. I'm glad the shelter did not adopt it out.
We currently have a little 6-7lb. LOVE BUG of a dog who is believed to be Toy Fox Terrier - who was said to have snapped at the man in her foster home. Well, now the shelter cannot adopt her out - and rescue is the only option because we work with them intensively to see just how bomb-proof (or not) they are. This one - whoever got snapped at must have done something really wrong - if it occurred at all - because she's not offered to snap at any of us, male or female! She's the sweetest thing ever - with that said, no kids under 12 and we'll screen carefully and let them know this potentially occurred so they are aware that under the right circumstances it might happen. 



> a few staff members who are against any type of discipline which is not helping the dog.


 A training collar is a tool - but what type discipline were you thinking of beyond that?


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

msvette2u said:


> How to train your dog not to pull- Loose Leash Walking - YouTube
> 
> When you can do this - (click the above link/watch video) why use a correction collar?
> 
> ...


 



Yes a training collar is a tool just like that harness in your video is a tool. What I am saying though is that this particular shelter doesn't like dogs to be corrected for misbehaviors such as jumping up, pulling on the leash, and door dashing. I am not condoning abusing a dog,and I agree that you should cater the training to the individual dog,but you can't fix everything with treats,hugs and kisses. 

I have seen quite a few dogs come through that particular shelter who have some serious aggression or dominance issues because they were never made to do anything.They had no rules. 



When walking through the lobby with a dog who repeatedly door dashed, I would quickly close (NOT SLAM) the door before the dog got outside.However a few of them have gotten their nose clipped by the door because they still tried to push the door open. To me this is not a combative way of teaching a dog to wait before exiting or entering,but I did get some ugly looks when the dog yelped. 


The German Shepherd that I was speaking about was pulled from the shelter,but was immediately put into a home in Upstate New York.He wasn 't sent to a rescue facility to be rehabbed.So yes I do think it was very irresponsible to not only ignore this dogs' behavior AND try to justify by saying that the dog was just playing. 


Again I'm not saying that they should let everyone do what they please with the dogs because a lot of people don't know how to properly use tools, even if it is considered to be 'non combative'. 

If you have a qualified person as myself and you claim to trust that person, you shouldn't have a problem with them trying to make the dogs more adoptable. I have since stopped volunteering there and moved on to another rescue who doesn't have a problem with my beliefs. They have actually seen me with my dogs and are impressed with how they behave.

I think a lot of people who want positive only or non combative training see those who use other tools such as a martingale collar or prong as people who don't love dogs as much as they do.I won't speak for anybody else,but that I am probably one of the biggest animals people around. I have taken some shelter dogs on car rides,and to other public places just to give the a break from the shelter. I stopped doing that though because I was approached about not being fair to the other dogs who haven't been walked. IMO isn't a competition to see who can outdo who as far as volunteering or fostering goes. Everyone decides how they want to help.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I am not condoning abusing a dog,and I agree that you should cater the training to the individual dog,but you can't fix everything with treats,hugs and kisses.


And again, what methods would you use to stop a dog jumping up, or pulling on the leash? Closing a door shut on a dog's muzzle can injure it, so you need to be careful about that.



> I think a lot of people who want positive only or non combative training see those who use other tools such as a martingale collar or prong as people who don't love dogs as much as they do.


I don't think that - but I do see them as being less creative, since there are proven methods - and again, watch the video for one example of how easy it can be to stop a dog from pulling without resorting to a choke chain or other aversive techniques, if this tiny gal can take a large dog straight from the shelter and have it walking nicely without pulling, then anyone should be able to.

I grew up with the mentality you have to push a dog around or pull or yank on them to get them to mind.
It has since been learned there's ways to work with them positively and it works as well or better/quicker than old methods. I'm excited and happy about that, and I fail to understand why people think it's coddling, or spoiling them, or whatever, since they actually work so beautifully on just about any dog out there. 

That is - I think the best training involves teaching the dog what TO DO, instead of constantly correcting them for what they should NOT do.

When you potty train a child, do you spank them when they soil in their diapers, or do you take them to the bathroom and praise them for pottying in the toilet?

If all you ever do is spank the child for pottying in their diaper, how will you ever get them to understand there's a proper place for pottying? 

Same with dogs - we train them best by showing them what to do and how to do it, rather than just correcting them for doing what we do not want them to do.

For one example - jumping up is universal for all dogs. It's their nature. So why scold them for _doing what dogs do_? Instead, teach them they will still get attention (and more of it!) when all 4 paws are on the floor!


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

msvette2u said:


> And again, what methods would you use to stop a dog jumping up, or pulling on the leash? Closing a door shut on a dog's muzzle can injure it, so you need to be careful about that.
> 
> 
> For one example - jumping up is universal for all dogs. It's their nature. So why scold them for _doing what dogs do_? Instead, teach them they will still get attention (and more of it!) when all 4 paws are on the floor!


 
I correct behaviors mentioned above by turning by back to a dog who jumps OR if they really persistent I will knee them. As far as leash pulling goes,as soon as the dog starts to go ahead of me,they get a quick pop with the leash and I am walking quickly in th opposite direction.They got lot of verbal praise when they come back to me. I am sure you won't agree with my methods and that's fine,but my dogs are well behaved and most importantly their not scarred from it. If you know what you are doing then one good correction is a lot better than a bunch of nagging corrections.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

In the video she teaches the dog how to walk w/out leash pops...it can be done 

Turning away is always advisable when dogs jump up since some dogs would prefer a knee to the chest to no interaction at all. Same with pushing them down with your hands. The dog is getting interaction so will continue to jump, whereas turning away withdraws all attention, and dog learns it gets attention _only _when all 4 paws are on the ground. 

I guess you have to understand why a method works rather than just assuming it's "not discipline". It _is_ discipline in fact, and more effective when done positively, than when aversive techniques are utilized, which is why I say it works quicker to teach a dog what to do rather than just punish it for doing what we find unacceptable (jumping up, etc.)

The dog, by jumping up, is seeking contact and affection. You've just rewarded it with a knee or your hands (pushing it down). When you withdraw all rewards (contact, which is what it wants) you teach it more effectively.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I have had many dogs in and out of my home and I have never used anything but positive training(treats, praise, and yes some hugs and kisses) A dog that is afraid or that has been abused or neglected is not going to respond well to someone correcting them. Its not the dogs fault that it is where it is and all dogs deserve a chance to be happy at some point. They come in and are treated as my own and loved the same way. I personally hate prong collars, I had to get one for my GSD to train at a club(it was a requirement) I put it on her once and it bothered me because she didn't need it. We have never gone back there and she has never had the prong on again. As far as closing a door in a dogs face so it doesn't door dash....well you can just as easily put the dog in a sit, tell it to wait, treat them for doing so, open door, tell them to stay, give a treat and repeat. IMO that is definitely going to get a better response from the dog. Why give a nervous dog more to be nervous about? Whether they came from a good or bad home, there whole life just changed and I'm sure they can sense something is wrong, as a volunteer or rescue I would think that one would be more concerned with making that dog comfortable, slowly work on some training and positive training can be fun for the dog and person!!


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> The dog, by jumping up, is seeking contact and affection. You've just rewarded it with a knee or your hands (pushing it down). When you withdraw all rewards (contact, which is what it wants) you teach it more effectively.



Yep, I turn around and once all fours are on the ground, the dog gets a treat and praise...it does work


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

In fact, often when dogs come in previously abused, we're happy when they jump up to initiate contact, especially a withdrawn, scared dog. 
It's different for a happy, stable, came-from-a-great-background 80lb. Labrador, who probably does need corrected for jumping, but even then withdrawing contact by turning is a superior method of training than kneeing.


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

I run a very tight ship with my own dogs and fosters. I use NILIF for all new dogs. When I first bring a new dog into my home I keep treats on me at all times and reward for even the smallest desirable behavior because many times these dogs have never had anything but negative reinforcement or punishment/physical "discipline."

The hardest dog I've ever rehabbed (my own adopted gsd, Basu) taught me that my toolbox needed to be a lot bigger than a prong collar and the old-fashioned yank and crank, negative reinforcement methods and (that I learned back in the 80s). 

I try to make training fun and rewarding and I have been amazed that once I learned a more motivational, reward-based, counter-conditioning style of training how quickly I could turn a dog around.


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

I agree with msvette2u and llombardo. There are better, more effective ways to train dogs, especially from a shelter, where their history is probably unknown. 
_________
Sue


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> The hardest dog I've ever rehabbed (my own adopted gsd, Basu) taught me that my toolbox needed to be a lot bigger than a prong collar and the old-fashioned yank and crank, negative reinforcement methods and (that I learned back in the 80s).


Good post!
Yep - and I grew up using a choke chain (probably incorrectly!) and the "old fashioned" way of training. I read the book "Water Dog" and trained my Springer that way.
But you get in these dogs who have overwhelming trust issues anyway, and you can compound their issues quickly by using physical corrections.


----------



## Elaine (Sep 10, 2006)

I quit fostering for the GSD rescue when they didn't like that I would correct my fosters. They much prefered the out of control behaviors in their fosters that made them so unadoptable. It made me crazy and went to fostering aussies.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I would correct my fosters. They much prefered the out of control behaviors


Depending on the corrections utilized, I'd prefer "out of control" behavior, too.

I'm curious though, why does it have to be one or the other? 
Can nobody figure out positive training methods, which I refer to as actual training, not just corrections which often teach the dog nothing?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Depending on the corrections utilized, I'd prefer "out of control" behavior, too.
> 
> I'm curious though, why does it have to be one or the other?
> Can nobody figure out positive training methods, which I refer to as actual training, not just corrections which often teach the dog nothing?



One can correct a dog all they want but unless they train it, the dog will never learn what it needs to. I'm sure that most fosters/rescues come with bad behaviors and in reality the only way to change that is to teach them new behaviors that are acceptable. A dog is not going to learn based on correction only. I can tell a dog no all I want when it jumps on me or I can knee it, but unless I train that dog not to jump(by praise and treats) the dog will never know what is right or wrong. A dog can not be expected to just know what is expected of it. I personally would not have a problem adopting a dog that seemed "out of control", that can be worked on once I brought it home. If a person adopts a dog that is in a shelter or foster care, they in reality should know that the chances of the dog having some issues are high. A person that adopts a dog has to be willing to work with the dog, bond with the dog, and make that dog a part of the family...if the person is looking for a perfect dog, then they will be looking for a long time. I also think that if I were to go to a rescue or foster to see a dog and I seen that corrections were being used I would have a problem with that..my main concern being the well being of the dog and taking in consideration what the dog has already been through. This is just my opinion.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> A dog can not be expected to just know what is expected of it.


Exactly...dogs can know what we don't like, but until taught what we want, and what we expect from them, they cannot be held responsible for doing what comes naturally to a dog (jumping up, chewing on things, going potty - _anywhere_; those are things dogs just do).


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

llombardo said:


> I also think that if I were to go to a rescue or foster to see a dog and I seen that corrections were being used I would have a problem with that..my main concern being the well being of the dog and taking in consideration what the dog has already been through. This is just my opinion.


It depends on the corrections being done, what they were being done for and if they were done properly. I think throwing out some of the old ideas just because they are old is silly. Some things have worked and worked well for many years. I have always rewarded my dogs with treats when they do something I like. I have also always corrected for doing things I don't like. I don't understand why it has to be all one way or the other way? A dog jumping on me is going to get a knee in the chest. For me it works. A dog that keeps all four paws on the ground is going to get rewarded. With loves or treats or both. Not every way works with every dog. Some dogs will not do well with corrections, and some could care less about treats. And not every dog is going to fit with every household. A sad lesson I learned a while back. Just because someone elses way is not your way does not mean it is bad or that that person is terrible. Corrections done correctly should be in that toolbox of tricks to keep on hand and dusted off and used if the situation calls for it.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

llombardo said:


> One can correct a dog all they want but unless they train it, the dog will never learn what it needs to. I'm sure that most fosters/rescues come with bad behaviors and in reality the only way to change that is *to teach them new behaviors (anything except what they are doing?) that are acceptable*. A dog is not going to learn based on correction only. *(Yes, mine have - "NO" - they learn to stop what they are doing!) *I can tell a dog no all I want when it jumps on me or I can knee it, but *unless I train that dog not to jump(by praise and treats) the dog will never know what is right or wrong. *A dog can not be expected to just know what is expected of it. I personally would not have a problem adopting a dog that seemed "out of control", that can be worked on once I brought it home. If a person adopts a dog that is in a shelter or foster care, they in reality should know that the chances of the dog having some issues are high. A person that adopts a dog has to be willing to work with the dog, bond with the dog, and make that dog a part of the family...if the person is looking for a perfect dog, then they will be looking for a long time. I also think that if I were to go to a rescue or foster to see a dog and I seen that *corrections were being used I would have a problem with that..*my main concern being the well being of the dog and taking in consideration *what the dog has already been through*. *How would you know this in many cases? *This is just my opinion.


And certainly everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Do you think that if a dog jumps up on the owner and EVERY time it does it, is told "NO" and then praised when the dog's paws on on the ground that it won't "Learn" that jumping is unacceptable behavior? I have not told it any specific "alternate" behavior other than not jumping as I don't care if it stands or sits or lays down or goes over and gets it's toys. All I want is for the dog NOT to jump.

"Alternate Behavior" sounds like what my training associates who practice the "Positive Only Reinforcement" approach also espouse. Would it be that you also follow that approach of "No Corrections" (i.e. in their words "Punishment")?


----------



## Elaine (Sep 10, 2006)

msvette2u said:


> Depending on the corrections utilized, I'd prefer "out of control" behavior, too.
> 
> I'm curious though, why does it have to be one or the other?
> Can nobody figure out positive training methods, which I refer to as actual training, not just corrections which often teach the dog nothing?


Interesting that you assume the corrections aren't positive. And why is positive the only good correction possible? 

I like that you think your way is the only right way when you have never seen me, my dogs, or my training methods.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

I said "Depending on the corrections utilized"



> Interesting that you assume the corrections aren't positive.


since you did not specify - I did not "assume". 

My way is not the only way but guess what? It's not "my way", it's the way of every positive trainer in the country (who's doing it right).

Here is my theory - with positive training, you cannot go wrong. You really cannot, if you are doing it right.

With physical corrections such as leash pops, smacking the dog, "crank and yank" or whatever it was BowWow said (I like that phrase!), kneeing it in the chest or shutting a door on it's face, you _can indeed _go wrong, and with rescued dogs with shaky and often abusive pasts, the _last_ thing you want to do is lose that trust you are trying to build.

And there you have it, in a nut shell, my philosophy on training _dogs in rescue_, so please don't _you_ presume to know what I think or believe about training methods.


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

I will be the first to admit that compulsion methods of training take less work on the part of the handler. But they didn't yield the same kind of results. Sure, the dog would behave but what was in it for them? A correction if they didn't do it right. Rafi likes treats but he works more effectively for a toy. He will also work for praise (to please me) but if it's fun (read BALL) then I get completely different results. Learning different types of training requires patience on the part of the handler.

Every dog is different and I've had to really stretch myself to figure out what works with some dogs but +R training by someone who knows what they're doing and takes the time to figure a dog out, can help a dog really reach their full potential. I have adopted and fostered both hard dogs and soft dogs but all have performed better and more consistently using positive reinforcement and counter conditioning. And all of my fosters left my house with excellent manners. I wish I had a before and after video for Basu because no one believed he was the same dog! 

And just a note: I have found that gsd rescues are more likely to allow and even encourage prong collars, etc. than shelters or other rescues.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> I said "Depending on the corrections utilized"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And there is a piece of my philosophy. 

A different approach of "firm fairness" and a level of correction/teaching determined by the behavior and the dog personality that we are trying to train. Suit the appraoch to the individual dog! Able to use a wide range of "tools" from the training toolbox.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> So maybe if you "let the dog decide what to do" (PO description), that will work better than "firm kindness".


Um...no. I have no idea what you are talking about "PO"? 

If I want the dog to do something I can either scold or "correct" him until he doesn't do the thing I did _not _want him to do...and I can hope he figures out what I want from him...
Or I can show him what _to_ do and I can reward him for doing it.

See, I don't have some "method". Whatever the "PO" method is, no clue what that is and never heard of that term.
I simply use what works, after observing the dog and how it will learn, I find out what is important to it (food, or praise or a toy), and go with that.


----------



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

I believe dogs and children need to learn what no means. Life is not about a constant stream of rewards for good behavior. Sometimes dogs, kids, and adults just need to do what they need to do.

I have taught many dogs over the years to not counter surf and many other unwanted behaviors by telling them no and placing them where I want them to be.
So if my dog is counter surfing I say no and put them on the floor. After a number of times then I just say no and the dog gets down. At some point the dog no longer counter surfs. Do this in a few different situations and the dog learns that when I say no it stops what it is doing,

There is no screaming, no yank and crank, no choke chains. I don't hit, kick or harm the dog in anyway.

I like my dogs to learn no.

If someone else prefer to redirect them or lure them with a treat or whatever it's ok with me.

The reason these threads get heated is because people who constantly put down any type of corrections or anything they don't consider positive can become very annoying holier than thou individuals.

I used marker training with Jack and am using it On Zena but I also use corrections. If some want to negotiate with their dogs all the time great. 

I raised most of the dogs that I owned the so called old fashioned way. They weren't neurotic or afraid of me and they did what they were trained to do. So while I believe that there are new methods such as marker training that can get fantastic results. I'm not going to eliminate corrections because some are adverse to almost anything that resembles a correction.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

msvette2u said:


> If I want the dog to do something I can either scold or "correct" him until he doesn't do the thing I did _not _want him to do...and I can hope he figures out what I want from him...
> Or I can show him what _to_ do and I can reward him for doing it.


I'm not sure why people think this is an either/or proposition?? You ARE allowed to do both! A light leash pop doesn't have to be anything more harsh than a tap on the shoulder. 
In my experience, animals (and people!) do better when they know what is wrong as well as what is right. A simple "ah ah" or a light pop of the leash can be helpful in guiding a behavior, especially when coupled with some type of reward for correct behavior.
Yes, some dogs do great with working out what is wanted by trial and error and building on past behaviors. Others, not so much. 
I don't think that exclusive punishment works of course. No one wants to be locked in a room and zapped until they figure out what is wrong. Locked in a room and rewarded when you do something like is more pleasant, but it's not always that quick.
It's like playing "Hot & Cold" with only half the clues


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

I'm sorry to disappoint, but no, in the world of rescue I will not jerk a dog or "pop" or "tap" or "thump" or whatever euphemism you want to toss about.
I'm speaking of dogs in rescue. I know what works and what does not. 
You do with your own personal dogs what you wish.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

codmaster said:


> And certainly everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
> 
> Do you think that if a dog jumps up on the owner and EVERY time it does it, is told "NO" and then praised when the dog's paws on on the ground that it won't "Learn" that jumping is unacceptable behavior? I have not told it any specific "alternate" behavior other than not jumping as I don't care if it stands or sits or lays down or goes over and gets it's toys. All I want is for the dog NOT to jump.
> 
> "Alternate Behavior" sounds like what my training associates who practice the "Positive Only Reinforcement" approach also espouse. Would it be that you also follow that approach of "No Corrections" (i.e. in their words "Punishment")?


I don't think it should be told no at all when it jumps, I think it should be ignored for bad behavior. Once the paws are on the ground then the praise and reward...Dogs are looking for any kind of attention they can get, whether its good or bad. By telling a dog NO, then rewarding it when it is on all fours would defeat the purpose and nothing would be learned except that when that dog jumps it knows that some kind of attention will be given, very confusing for the dog. I find that I definitely get further with the dog when things are done in a positive manner. Correcting the dog is not going to speed up the process and sometimes it does more damage then good...I am speaking about dogs that are in shelters or in rescue groups without a known history.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Elaine said:


> Interesting that you assume the corrections aren't positive. And why is positive the only good correction possible?
> 
> I like that you think your way is the only right way when you have never seen me, my dogs, or my training methods.


I'm interested in knowing some examples of your training methods, really I'm not being sarcastic or anything. I'm open to ideas as long as it doesn't jeopardize the dogs well being.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I believe dogs and children need to learn what no means. Life is not about a constant stream of rewards for good behavior. Sometimes dogs, kids, and adults just need to do what they need to do.
> 
> I have taught many dogs over the years to not counter surf and many other unwanted behaviors by telling them no and placing them where I want them to be.
> So if my dog is counter surfing I say no and put them on the floor. After a number of times then I just say no and the dog gets down. At some point the dog no longer counter surfs. Do this in a few different situations and the dog learns that when I say no it stops what it is doing,
> ...



This thread is not about our own dogs...I do tell my dogs no, but that is well after the fact that they are trained and know better. I as an owner took the time to train them from the beginning..they aren't scared, abused, or neglected..so its completely different when dealing with dogs that never had owners that cared. This thread that is about rescue dogs, that need sometimes very serious help to get over the abuse they encountered. When working with abused and neglected dogs I would think that lots of patience, time, and love will work wonders over correcting a dog everytime it did something wrong. ****, people in rescue work are in it because they love animals, want whats best for them, and to put a prong collar on an abused dog and give him a pop is not going to make that dog any easier to work with. *Lots of people on here are confusing how an abused rescue dog versus a happy go lucky dog with a good home should be handled. 
* It is sadly not even close to the same way.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I believe dogs and children need to learn what no means. Life is not about a constant stream of rewards for good behavior. Sometimes dogs, kids, and adults just need to do what they need to do.


:thumbup: I couldn't agree more. It's my pet peeve on child rearing and dog training as well. Setting boundries and being consistent is what IMO makes kids and dogs feel secure.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

shepherdmom said:


> :thumbup: I couldn't agree more. It's my pet peeve on child rearing and dog training as well. Setting boundries and being consistent is what IMO makes kids and dogs feel secure.


I agree also if its MY dog and not a 1 year old rescue that was abused and neglected...completely two different worlds. Once the dog learns and trust someone, then it learns its boundaries.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

llombardo said:


> *Lots of people on here are confusing how an abused rescue dog versus a happy go lucky dog with a good home should be handled. *
> It is sadly not even close to the same way.


I've had several rescue dogs over the years. They are all treated the same way in my house. That being said, I won't take a dog with agression issues. I can and have worked with seperation anxiety, submissive peeing, wanting to chase small animals, or some of the small stuff. I absolutely refuse to deal with human aggression. The only dog I've ever taken back was aggressive toward my husband.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

Maybe I should have been more clear about what I meant in the beginning. I was talking about tools/methods AFTER the trust has been built. Obviously it would be a dumbass move to try to set boundaries with a dog who is terrified. No matter what tools you choose to utilize, you have to have trust first. This was really geared more towards dogs that are no longer in the shelter,but maybe pulled from the shelter and fostered in my home. Sometimes on a foster application it is asked what methods you use for training. Even though I have adopted a few dogs from the shelter I mentioned before,and they have seen how much more well behaved they are,they still were uncomfortable with the fact that I do correct my dogs,and I don't go around with treats in my pocket.What bothered them even more is that any foster dog would be used treated the same way. After the bond is built of course.

I'm not saying treats DON'T EVER have a place in training,but I don't use them that often. Sometimes I use a combo of treats and a collar,but I never use treats solely. 




llombardo said:


> This thread is not about our own dogs...*Lots of people on here are confusing how an abused rescue dog versus a happy go lucky dog with a good home should be handled. *
> It is sadly not even close to the same way.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Ask Chelle about collars - her dog had one ingrown/embedded and now cannot use a prong or any such thing.
Gotta know something alternative to that.
Curious if you watched the loose leash video and what you think of it? Do you think you'd try that with a dog?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> *Um...no. I have no idea what you are talking about "PO"? *
> 
> *Sorry, I thought you would know what a "Positive Only" training philosophy was. My mistake on your knowledge of this acronym. Sorry. It just sounded from your post that you would recognize the topic.It means that the trainer uses only Positive reinforcement Only to let a dog know when he did something right and NO corrections or "Punishment" - like a verbal "NO", or even worse a "Leash Pop" or even more worse, a Prong Collar. It sounded to me from your post that this was what you advocated and did?*
> 
> ...


 
Good way to do it - whatever works is good!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

shepherdmom said:


> I've had several rescue dogs over the years. They are all treated the same way in my house. That being said, I won't take a dog with agression issues. I can and have worked with seperation anxiety, submissive peeing, wanting to chase small animals, or some of the small stuff. *I absolutely refuse to deal with human aggression.* The only dog I've ever taken back was aggressive toward my husband.


 
Don't blame you for that! 

Only pros should have to deal with this behavior. And even for them it can be very tough (as well as risky!).


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> I'm sorry to disappoint, but no, in the world of rescue I will not jerk a dog or "pop" or "tap" or "thump" or whatever euphemism you want to toss about.
> I'm speaking of dogs in rescue. I know what works and what does not.
> *You do with your own personal dogs what you wish.*


 
Thank you!

And the same for you!


"Thump!" --- ???????????????????????


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Ask Chelle about collars - her dog had one ingrown/embedded and now cannot use a prong or any such thing.
> Gotta know something alternative to that.
> Curious if you watched the loose leash video and what you think of it? Do you think you'd try that with a dog?


My shelter doggie 2 months ago.... Terrified of collars had to train with a harness. Scabs on his neck from whatever happened before we got him. 










Ivan today...loves his collar and walks just fine with it. 









BTW no resource guarding at my house. Sharing a high value marrow bone. swoop


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

codmaster said:


> Don't blame you for that!
> 
> Only pros should have to deal with this behavior. And even for them it can be very tough (as well as risky!).


Thank you. I still feel terrible about it, but I know she went back to a safe place.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

Well I never say never with anything and am open to alternatives if what I am doing can't be done with a dog for whatever the reason.So yes I would use an alternative method if I had to for the dog's well being. It's all about the dogs. 





msvette2u said:


> Ask Chelle about collars - her dog had one ingrown/embedded and now cannot use a prong or any such thing.
> Gotta know something alternative to that.
> Curious if you watched the loose leash video and what you think of it? Do you think you'd try that with a dog?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Jack's Dad said:


> The reason these threads get heated is because people who constantly put down any type of corrections or anything they don't consider positive can become very annoying holier than thou individuals.


I don't think that's the only reason why these kinds of threads go off the rails. The term "PO" keeps getting trotted out with the assumption that everyone who prefers positive reinforcement methods (such as marker training) to methods relying primarily on physical force (compulsion) NEVER use corrections of any kind, which is rarely true. And that because they never tell their dog "no" (theoretically), they have untrained dogs who are allowed to get away with bad behavior.  

I know there are positive "ONLY" advocates out there, but in reality there aren't that many people who don't ever use corrections, and it's silly and pointless to keep arguing about how bad PO training can be (and yes, it certainly CAN be), when most people aren't even training that way in the first place! So why keep making this assumption and arguing against a type of training hardly anybody here actually DOES? 

Just because there are some trainers out there who advocate never correcting a dog, (even verbally), and some dog owners who accept bad behavior rather than nip it in the bud with a few well timed and appropriate corrections, that doesn't mean that all PR trainers and dog owners are like that. If we could just keep these discussions to what people _here_ are actually saying and doing rather than what some OTHER trainer or person that you met somewhere says or does, it would be much more productive.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Well said Debbie!


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

Yes, Deb! 

Really, there is a lot to learn out there. When I adopted Basu I started reading people like Patricia McConnell, Pat Miller, etc. and found a whole new world out there from the one I had been introduced to back in the 80s. 

These threads drive me nuts b/c they are mainly based on assumptions and ignorance. Based on 25 years of experience with a variety of dogs and training styles, I do prefer positive reinforcement, reward-based training (vs. compulsion) and counter conditioning. Rafi constantly gets compliments on his good behavior wherever we go. The guy across the street screams at and yanks on his (very expensive, well bred) show dog constantly yet she repeats the same undesirable behaviors over and over again and tucks her tail and cowers in anticipation of being yelled at and corrected. Clearly, his methods aren't working and he really doesn't understand his dog. There are other people in my neighborhood who hit their dogs for barking or running across the street (when they have left them outside without a barrier or leash) and still others who do nothing at all to interrupt rude behaviors and others who have terrible timing and give their dogs treats for undesirable behaviors. My conclusion is that all of these people are really poor owners/trainers. 

Using positive reinforcement and counter conditioning does not equal not setting boundaries and letting your dogs run wild just like using some corrections and/or compulsion in training does not equal beating your dogs. I used the latter with my first dog, Massie (and no treats for training!), and she was well trained but hard-headed but I used the former with Rafi and he is much more biddable and easier to work with. For Chama I started with compulsion/corrections (-R) and then moved to mostly +R and saw a HUGE increase in her willingness to work/learn. 

And I have worked (successfully) with dogs who were human aggressive. In one case (Basu) he almost certainly would have been euthanized had he not ended up with me. Harsh physical corrections and neglect were what caused his (fear) aggression and out-of-control behavior in the first place; structure, boundaries, positive-reinforcement, food rewards and counter-conditioning were what made him into a "normal," well-behaved dog. That real experience with a very challenging, damaged dog is what sold me: not a tv show or a particular trainer or a book or website that I read.


----------



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

I agree with you Debbie. 

However, often when people come on here with a problem of some kind they will be told to find a trainer, a "positive only trainer".

My feeling is to find a trainer that can help you find a way to correct the behavior.
Why limit yourself. It would be just as rediculous for me to suggest that they find a "compulsion trainer" only.
I agree that in this day and age almost no one uses some exclusive method of training.
The terms PO and compulsion/correction conjure up extreme scenarios in some peoples minds that simply are not true. 
Maybe we should have a thread on what those terms mean to different individuals.
I have said this before but will repeat it.
If someone says domination around me I think of sports. My wife worked for years with abused women and children, when they hear a word like domination it has a whole different meaning than it does to me. It is definitely not a good word for them.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I agree with you Debbie.
> 
> However, often when people come on here with a problem of some kind they will be told to find a trainer, a "positive only trainer".


Not only that... those of us who are just trying to help often get jumped. I've had shepherds for 25 years. I'm not a trainer, or an expert by any means but if someone says how do you stop a puppy from jumping I would say you know what worked for me was to put my knee up and say no every time the dog tries jumping. There are several people on here who would tear into me for saying that. It may not be positive reinforcement or what ever the current political correct term is, but my dogs don't jump on people. They are not hurt in any way. It may not be your method, but it works for me so why is it necessary to be so derogatory when I share my ideas?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Jack's Dad said:


> However, often when people come on here with a problem of some kind they will be told to find a trainer, a "positive only trainer".


I agree that people are usually told to find a PR trainer, but I don't recall reading any threads where it was specified that the trainer has to be "positive _only_". It's certainly possible that there have been some threads where that's happened and I just missed it, but somehow any time PR training is mentioned there seems to be the assumption that they're talking about PO, even when that's not expressly stated, and isn't actually what the person meant. :shrug:

I will absolutely admit to being biased towards teaching my dogs what I DO want them to do - I think marker training is very clear and effective way to communicate with my dogs, but that doesn't mean that I don't also teach them what I DON'T want them to do. I just like a dog that understands why it's in their best interest to do what I want, I prefer a dog that thinks and makes good choices, rather than just waiting to be told what to do, I want an enthusiastic partner that happily complies. But if a correction is required, I have no problem doing that.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

shepherdmom said:


> I'm not a trainer, or an expert by any means but if someone says how do you stop a puppy from jumping I would say you know what worked for me was to put my knee up and say no every time the dog tries jumping.


I don't have a problem with this, I just think it's more productive to teach your dog what you'd rather have them do instead of jumping. If you don't care what they do as long as they don't jump, that's fine. Your dogs - you get to decide those things. 

But rather than just teaching them _not_ to jump, you could teach them _to_ sit automatically to greet people. You can't sit and jump at the same time, they're incompatible behaviors, so training the sit to greet also solves the jumping problem.

ETA: I'm a big fan of training default behaviors in general, so that in the absence of any cue they'll do it automatically. This is something that can only be taught using positive reinforcement.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

What is rather funny is...people come here looking for answers and help because they've tried all the other aversion or negative or punishment based techniques out there. They often have trainers who not only do those things, they are also often told that they need to "be the boss" or "roll the dog", etc. 
So we go "hey try this positive training method" and some of the same ones (every time) start freaking out and say "oh you want your dog to 'choose'" to behave blahblahblah. 

Well if these folks weren't floundering badly, they would not be here. So why not post up some positive training method vids like loose leash walking, adding food to the bowl instead of insisting on pulling the bowl away, etc.?
Because - as I live and breathe - those folks have_ tried_ kneeing the dog, they've already _ tried_ taking the bowl, and those things simply _were not working_!
If those things worked so well, why so many issues that continue on?

And out of curiosity - what _do_ you guys that insist that tossing a yummy in the bowl as you approach is so awful, what do you do when a dog resource guards it's food? 

We have a little Boston who is a horrible guarder and scruffing her, taking her things, etc. have not worked! And believe me, we tried them! 
The only thing that would work is a) not giving her treats, or b) "trading up" until she became comfortable with us taking her things because she knew something better was just around the corner...she learned to trust us more by doing that, than by any of the aversion techniques we could dream up including taking her things away from her.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I don't have a problem with this, I just think it's more productive to teach your dog what you'd rather have them do instead of jumping. If you don't care what they do as long as they don't jump, that's fine. Your dogs - you get to decide those things.
> 
> But rather than just teaching them _not_ to jump, you could teach them _to_ sit automatically to greet people. You can't sit and jump at the same time, they're incompatible behaviors, so training the sit to greet also solves the jumping problem.
> 
> ETA: I'm a big fan of training default behaviors in general, so that in the absence of any cue they'll do it automatically. *This is something that can only be taught using positive reinforcement*.


 
Curious as to how you would come to this conclusion that ONLT Yositive reinforcement can be used here?

For example, I taught my dog (male 4yo GSD) to sit and wait automatically whenever we come into the house thru the door in from the garage and also sit and wait in front of the sliding door going out into the back yard.

And we used a combo of things - started out saying SIT and WAIT each time doing one of those things, and also used a correction (verbal "AAHHH!) each time he didn't do it and a call back into a sit if he broke thru the door and a resit.

We actually started in the very beginning with a leash and a training collar in the very beginning and actually used a few leash corrections as he started learning the procedure. But we also used verbal praise ("Good Wait") and a bunch of little kibble and other treats as well when he was successful.

My point is that it was a COMBO of things that got him to about 99%+ compliance and now will do it without any verbal commands at all the vast majority of the time.

I know that Baron responds best to a combo of things - treats, praise and sometimes needs a gentle reminder that he MUST obey! But he is a VERY dominant pushy self confident dog; and of course a softer dog could very likely respond better to a different set of training.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> What is rather funny is...people come here looking for answers and help because they've tried all the other aversion or negative or punishment based techniques out there. They often have trainers who not only do those things, they are also often told that they need to "be the boss" or "roll the dog", etc.
> So we go "hey try this positive training method" and some of the same ones (every time) start freaking out and say "oh you want your dog to 'choose'" to behave blahblahblah.
> 
> Well if these folks weren't floundering badly, they would not be here. So why not post up some positive training method vids like loose leash walking, adding food to the bowl instead of insisting on pulling the bowl away, etc.?
> ...


So, one small question, perhaps.

Am I reading what you are saying correctly - it sounds like you are saying that a Positive approach *ALWAYS WORKS FOR EVERYONE* - or did I misunderstand what you are saying?

If it doesn't work sometimes - what would cause it not to work - applied wrong (How?), or ??????.

I.E. would this approach of throwing treats into the bowl for a food aggressive dog always create a safe dog around their bowl so the owner could eventually walk over and take the bowl away?

And since it sounds like you have used this method very successfully with a large number of dogs - how long on average (best guess) does it take to fix the dog and what was the maximum length of time it took to be successful?


I admit that I have had only one adult GSD (11-12 mo) that I acquired that was food aggressive that we had to train this behavior out of, as none of the 8/9 GSD puppies that we have had ever showed any signs of food aggression whatsoever.

Took us about a month to get her to where anyone in the family could take the food bowl (full of food) away from her with absolutely no aggression from her. And then give it right back to her, of course.

Thanks - I am very interested in some good objective empirical information about this method of treating FA dogs! A couple of friends actually have a couple of these that they are working on.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> a Positive approach ALWAYS WORKS FOR EVERYONE


IMO, if applied correctly, yes, it can work well for a dog. Of course you don't "never tell them no" or "Ahh ahh!" since I think "no" can be overused.



> I.E. would this approach of throwing treats into the bowl for a food aggressive dog always create a safe dog around their bowl so the owner could eventually walk over and take the bowl away?


Dogs guard because they are afraid their food will be taken. Then human reaches down, snatches the bowl out and the dog's "worse fears" are confirmed. Now the human just seems kind of a bully - the dog will snarl, stiffen body, etc. 
What showing them you have something better will do is teach them that "Hey, GOOD things happen when people approach", and take away the mistrust (which was caused by human taking away bowl during meal), and have them looking forward to humans approaching bowl. 



> And since it sounds like you have used this method very successfully with a large number of dogs - how long on average (best guess) does it take to fix the dog and what was the maximum length of time it took to be successful?


We just operate this way - and work with the dog this way until dog learns to trust, I don't know as there's a "maximum time" and we don't start doing a lot of aversive corrections or whatever, so we don't give the dog a chance to fail by biting due to something we did.

The thing is...I've learned what "works" and what "doesn't work" and punishing dogs for doing dog things does not work. Rewarding them for doing what we want them to do, and ignoring the things we don't want them to do works much better. It's just how we do, by observing and learning, it's not like we set out saying to ourselves, "we'll never punish, we'll always reward", etc. It just happened that it worked better when we trained using the latter.

It's funny and strange and amazing when you see dogs respond the same way. Barring a severe behavioral issue or a disease process of the brain or something weird, all dogs will respond universally to, for instance, clicker training. 
You could walk up and take a stranger's dog from them and clicker train it, and if done properly (I'm no good at clicker training but have seen it IN ACTION including on humans!) it works! It's amazing stuff really. 
We do a lot of what you'd do with a clicker, but just without clickers because my timing is generally off.
We trained a deaf dog in the clicker training type training and she knew a ton of things we taught her just by using a website and videos. I mean...she could not hear the word "NO" or even an "AHH AHH!" so I know this stuff works 

The deaf dog was FA, btw, and we simply made her sit, and hand fed her, including our then-10yr. old daughter, until she realized we meant good things and not bad/taking away food. She never had issues w/FA or treat aggression after that.



> If it doesn't work sometimes - what would cause it not to work - applied wrong (How?), or ??????.


Honestly I think it would fail due to owner's impatience or applying incorrectly. It's tough and more work to learn what will work for a dog, and what needs to be done in order to fix an issue that is pre-existing, that is, we did not cause it.

But some of it - most of it, is amazingly simple. 

This mistrustful, overly submissive Golden for instance - she's got to be handled with kid gloves or she will squat and pee all over. I need to clip her before Wed. which is when an adopter meets her. 
Anyway - I simply won't give her a chance to squat and piddle. Keep walking, distract her from wanting to squat/pee, etc. If she does, ignore it. Only reward (or talk to her even) when her butt is up and she's not trying to roll over or piddle. 
ETC. later rinse repeat.


----------



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

Msevette: 

I'm glad this works for you. My problem is that it is almost like a religion for you and some others. 
As I said before, I grew up a long time ago and all that was available was choke chains and praise. 
It worked whether you agree or not. Dogs weren't abused unless their owners did not know how to use thos tool appropriately.
I agree with Debbie for the most part and am using PR with my 9 month old puppy.
She is super high drive and sometimes gets correctons. It works for me and lots of others.
The religious fervor of some PR/PO people is what drives me up a wall.
It is not a my way is the only way.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> If you don't care what they do as long as they don't jump, that's fine. Your dogs - you get to decide those things.
> 
> But rather than just teaching them _not_ to jump, you could teach them _to_ sit automatically to greet people. You can't sit and jump at the same time, they're incompatible behaviors, so training the sit to greet also solves the jumping problem.


I live in the middle of nowhere and prefer that they look intimidating at the door (not sitting) even if they are the biggest babies on the planet.  (who is it... running to the door barking when they hear a knocking sound is a favorite game we play). 

As you say to each his/her own.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> My problem is that it is almost like a religion for you and some others.


Really, how do you figure??
Because I say "this works", because I saw it work? And because I can't figure out why some are so opposed despite having never tried it? 
I grew up in the era of choke chains too, but I learned new and better ways. I never closed my mind to new training methods, especially when I saw SO many dogs failed using old "tried and true" methods of training!
Guess where the washouts (from the old training methods) are? Sitting in shelters and waiting to come into rescue before the needle, all because their owners trained one way and if the dog did not learn, then it was the dog's fault.

I prefer to think it's the owner's fault, and that any dog can be taught anything, if it has the right training methods offered it. 

And again, if you'd read my last post, why would I recommend the same methods that have failed in the past, when owners have tried them and now need new ideas?

I honestly used what worked, by observing hundreds of dogs and their reactions to what I was doing, and the way they learned and responded best. I could not go manhandle a dog in the field so I learned new, better and safer ways of doing things. I mean these dogs are running loose in a field after (often) having bitten someone or killed another animal, so I had to be resourceful and creative. I knew what did not work, because they are now in my care as an ACO so I did different/new things. 
And it's a "religion" to me? 
Sigh. Hardly so.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> What is rather funny is...people come here looking for answers and help because they've tried all the other aversion or negative or punishment based techniques out there. They often have trainers who not only do those things, they are also often told that they need to "be the boss" or "roll the dog", etc.
> So we go "hey try this positive training method" and some of the same ones (every time) start freaking out and say "oh you want your dog to 'choose'" to behave blahblahblah.


What about the ones that have tried every treat on the planet and their dog is just not interested? It works both ways. Sometimes people need to know that it is ok to tell your dog no! My big Shadow was a wonderful dog but he could have cared less about any type of food. Toys were fun but only on his terms. Treat based training did not work for him. He knew his size and he pushed every limit on the planet. Corrections worked for him. My little Ivan is totally different. He will do anything for food but don't raise your voice or he will pee all over the place. No one method works all the time and on every dog. Even PO although some people like to claim differently.


----------



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

What part of other people do it differently and it *works* do you not understand.

I'm sure you do an excellent job with training dogs.

Others do it differently and do an excellent job.

How about giving those who don't agree 100% with your view some credit.

I'm not an advocate for compulsion/correction only training. I simply think there are times when they may be used more effectively.

I do agree with you that owners can be jerks and that is why so many animals are dumped in shelters and rescues. I think there are many reasons people dump dogs and one of the least likely is their training methods. My guess would be they didn't want or try to train their dogs no matter what method or lack of they used. A lot of people are ignorant and punish dogs for things the animal doesn't even understand.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Gharrissc said:


> I have been involved with fostering and volunteering with shelters for several years now,and noticed that quite a few of them seem to be against correcting the behavior in dogs without baiting them with treats. I personally only use verbal and physical praise when training my dogs and any fosters that come in.I have also used a Martingale and sometimes a Prong collar on a few dogs that needed it. I realize that all tools don't work for all dogs,but it's just surprising to see how many shelter staff seem to frown down upon correcting a dog or not using treats. It's like they feel as if you can't be a dog lover if you don't let the dog get away with murder. I know that a lot of these animals come from bad situations,but it still doesn't excuse bad behavior. I've actually had some staff members become defensive when I've pointed out behaviors some dogs exhibited that could be a problem down the road. For example there was a 9 month old black German Shepherd at a shelter a few months ago who snapped at a few individuals that walked past him in the lobby. This dog was a favorite of the staff and they actually said that he was 'just playing' when he did this. A few days later this dog was rescued and sent to Upstate New York. I still wonder if they moved him so quickly because they knew that he had issues and didn't want to be held liable.
> 
> I'm not saying everyone who comes to the shelter should be allowed to just put a tool on a dog and use it blindly. Nor am I saying that ALL SHELTERS are this way. A lot of the ones I have dealt with though seem to have at least a few staff members who are against any type of discipline which is not helping the dog.
> 
> I just wanted some opinions on whether or not you use any type of training collar on foster dogs?


I am confused and have not seen this in the six pages of responses so far. You put martingale with prong collar as a training tool. And in a later post, you have said this again, like a martingale is something that people might object to for some reason, and I am really wondering if we are calling the same device a martingale. 

Deer Leather Martingale Dog Collar

Is this what we are talking about? I use these martingales, and they are NOT a correction collar, not a training collar. They are light and easy to use and will not allow a dog to slip out of them, but they really cannot be used for corrections the way a prong collar can, and they certainly do not self-correct.

I think this has gone along way too far already to jump in now, so I will just say that the longer I deal with dogs, and the more dogs I deal with, the more I realize that dogs respond to positive training methods. I really don't think it is like a religion with some of us as much as sometimes those that shun these methods, tend to be hyper-defensive about their prong collars and corrections.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

shepherdmom said:


> What about the ones that have tried every treat on the planet and their dog is just not interested? It works both ways. Sometimes people need to know that it is ok to tell your dog no! My big Shadow was a wonderful dog but he could have cared less about any type of food. Toys were fun but only on his terms. Treat based training did not work for him. He knew his size and he pushed every limit on the planet. Corrections worked for him. My little Ivan is totally different. He will do anything for food but don't raise your voice or he will pee all over the place. No one method works all the time and on every dog. Even PO although some people like to claim differently.


Arwen did not care about treats at all. Corrections were not the way to go with her. Toys were not her thing. I found that her thing was praise, meted out properly and could get her to do anything. One needs to find what motivates their dog. Personally for training, I prefer to motivate the dog with something positive rather than something negative.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

No I am not calling the same device a martingale. I was just saying that the particular shelter that I used to volunteer at didn't want those collars used on dogs.They always wanted harnesses and really even didn't want the happy go lucky dogs corrected for misbehavior.This whole post has really gotten out of control,but it's been good to see everyone's differing views. 









selzer said:


> I am confused and have not seen this in the six pages of responses so far. You put martingale with prong collar as a training tool. And in a later post, you have said this again, like a martingale is something that people might object to for some reason, and I am really wondering if we are calling the same device a martingale.
> 
> Deer Leather Martingale Dog Collar
> 
> ...


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Selzer said it ALL!!!



> I will just say that the longer I deal with dogs, and the more dogs I deal with, the more I realize that *dogs respond to positive training methods. *I really don't think it is like a religion with some of us as much as* sometimes those that shun these methods, tend to be hyper-defensive about their prong collars and corrections.*





> Personally for training, I prefer to motivate the dog with something positive rather than something negative.


Perfect. 
I might add, we are talking about SHELTER/RESCUE DOGS as the title of the thread says.
If you want to correct your own dog into obedience that is fine, but it does not work on shelter/rescue dogs, for many and various reasons. 
I prefer learning the dog and what will motivate it. 
Treats aren't the only thing out there 



> This whole post has really gotten out of control,


 
What were you hoping to find, that we agreed with the shelters, or you?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> ETA: I'm a big fan of training *default behaviors in general*, so that in the absence of any cue they'll do it automatically. This is something that can only be taught using positive reinforcement.





codmaster said:


> Curious as to how you would come to this conclusion that ONLT Yositive reinforcement can be used here?


How about YOU explain how to train a default behavior using another training method. 

Or were you taking my comment out of context? I was talking about _default behaviors in general_, which is exactly what I said. I stand by that, but perhaps I lack imagination, so feel free to enlighten me.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

selzer said:


> Arwen did not care about treats at all. Corrections were not the way to go with her. Toys were not her thing. I found that her thing was praise, meted out properly and could get her to do anything. One needs to find what motivates their dog. Personally for training, I prefer to motivate the dog with something positive rather than something negative.


Shadow had one thing he loved and lived for and that was me. From the first time I met him at 5 weeks and he crawled up onto my lap, when I came back to take him home at 8 weeks and from then on out he was my dog. He did what I wanted when I wanted and I could not be there every single time to motivate the dog. He had to work for my kids and my husband as well. This dog was never hurt, never had a bad experience but he was corrected, because that was the ONLY way to train him and dang it now you've got me tearing up because I miss him so much!


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

I wasn't hoping to have anyone agree with me. That's why I asked for opinions. Agreeing to disagree is part of a healthy debate. 







msvette2u said:


> What were you hoping to find, that we agreed with the shelters, or you?


----------



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

I really don't think it is like a religion with some of us as much as sometimes those that shun these methods, tend to be hyper-defensive about their prong collars and corrections.

Selzer:
What you said above is the problem. I have not seen anyone on here shun positive methods. Certainly not me. 

No one would be defensive about prongs or corrections if others would accept the fact that they work in some situations and are probably used by many people who might prefer not to admit it.
Positive is great but it does not apply in every situation.

I use a prong when I walk my dog because there are things that can happen where I want more control. My dogs don't need it to go for a walk but if a deer jumps up and takes off I want more control. If I run into an agressive dog Jack will not back down so I want more control.

I'm not going to apologize for that because somebody thinks prongs are some medieval torture device. Their problem not mine.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

I have prongs and I use them. I also use corrections - sometimes physical, frequently verbal. I'm not defensive about that, and I don't try to hide it. 

Just in case anyone was wondering.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> .......................
> I think this has gone along way too far already to jump in now, so I will just say that the longer I deal with dogs, and the more dogs I deal with, the more I realize that dogs respond to positive training methods. *I really don't think it is like a religion with some of us as much as sometimes those that shun these methods, tend to be hyper-defensive about their prong collars and corrections.*


Some folks on either side have and demonstrate a religious like fervor for their chosen method!

Not me, I think that many methods will work with most dogs, and that the training approach is best picked based on the individual dog and their temperament!

I tried the positive only (no physical corrections and only rarely allowed even a verbal correction (i.e. NO)) based on the instructors in our local obedience club, when we got our current male GSD about 4 years ago after a period of about 5 years since our previous dog passed on. Didn't work very well! 

He is a VERY dominant, pushy dog and was called "the most self confident dog, by far" that she had ever seen by his experienced animal behaviorist!) And "a very rare temperament in a show GSD" by the ScH trainer and pro K9 trainer we also used. He was also a VERY independent dog with no fear of anything that we ever encountered!

When I finally wised up and started asserting myself and correcting him physically (now, for you folks that might think this consisted of physically hurting him, I didn't, and he even still loves me!) when he really acted up - he has changed very noticably in his respect for me. By no means is he perfect, but I have a great deal more control over him and he listens MUCH better now. He needed to develop respect.

So lets all just agree to disagree on the 
BEST" method to train a dog. There is no Best!

And I also have to think that there is *no perfect infallable method* that anyone can use with a 100% success rate - doesn't happen! 

As an example, should have seen one of my previous "Positive" training professional instructors trying to handle my dog when he was about 2yo and at his height of brattiness - she could not even get him to go back into his run one day. He wasn't aggressive - just decided that there were better things to do out in the yard! And whatever treat/toy that she tried wasn't as interesting to him as he really wanted to do otherwise that day. (Usually one of those things worked very well to get him to go running back into his run! But he decided it wasn't enough that day. And BTW, she never even asked to handle him in any later class again (used to use him a lot in class) - I personally, and very unfortunately, think that he scared the heck out of her that day in the yard.

A little compulsion would work wonders with a dog like my guy used to be!

But each trainer should pick whatever method they think will work.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> I really don't think it is like a religion with some of us as much as sometimes those that shun these methods, tend to be hyper-defensive about their prong collars and corrections.
> 
> Selzer:
> What you said above is the problem. I have not seen anyone on here shun positive methods. Certainly not me.
> ...


I have a prong collar, two of them somewhere. But no, I don't use them, because I can get the results I want without them. And I can control any of my dogs in any situation without a prong collar, without any collar for that matter -- most of the time they are naked, though I will generally put a collar on them when I leave my property, but not always. 

There is at least one person on here that is extremely denegrating to people who suggest positive methods. If you suggest some positive methods to shape behavior or train something, that person gets into this positive-only ideology, and tries to make us feel like pathetic ignorant fanatics. 

I use corrections, usually just a change in the tone of my voice, but my dogs know when they are doing something I do not want them to. 

But I agree with MSVette about shelter dogs/rescue dogs/returned to breeder dogs. You really do not know what this dog has experienced, but like as not the old yank and crank mentality was probably a part of it. If not, then it is possible that the people either did not train/socialize, or were not the best choice to train or socialize the puppy, and now that puppy/dog needs to gain confidence in the people around him. This is so much more important than not jumping up that I can understand why people are giving the evil eye. The chances are the dog is where he is because corrections did not work. He needs something fair and consistent so that he can learn to trust people. He will not trust people if pain is a part of the procedure. Sorry.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I'm not going to apologize for that because somebody thinks prongs are some medieval torture device. Their problem not mine.


Who said that? Seriously?? 
If you looked @ my photos ever, you'd see a prong on my dog. Prongs have their place, but working (positive) daily w/a dog, I believe you can train so you don't have to use a prong. The woman in the video I posted didn't need one and she grabbed a big ol' shelter dog and walked w/him just fine.

Cod - your trainer was somewhat 'learned' but also not, because she couldn't think of an alternative to treats. 
A good "positive" trainer would figure out what motivates the dog as we've mentioned in the last few pages.

As for treating it like a religion - I was asked what I do, and I explained. How is that being fanatical or being "religious" about it? I find that comment to be quite demeaning and insulting.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I have prongs and I use them. I also use corrections - sometimes physical, frequently verbal. I'm not defensive about that, and I don't try to hide it.
> 
> Just in case anyone was wondering.


and I carry treats in my pocket and have a kong in my car. Just sayin.... BTW I also don't own a prong. Im not against them, I've just have not yet needed one.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

codmaster said:


> Some folks on either side have and demonstrate a religious like fervor for their chosen method!
> 
> Not me, I think that many methods will work with most dogs, and that the training approach is best picked based on the individual dog and their temperament!
> 
> ...


Codmaster, maybe it's all the exclamation points. When someone says, 

"Prong collars did not work for me." 

it is very different than,

"Prong collars did not work for me!" 

Maybe I am misreading the passion in your statements because of your punctuation usage.


----------



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

To me when folk think there is only one way to the exclusion of others that is religious fervor.

Selzer: 

How do you proof your dogs recall if it takes off after a deer. 

Maybe I could train Jack to somewhere near 100% recall if I could find a deer that was willing to help me.

I don't think they have invented the treat that either of my dogs would care more about than a deer. Unless you can proof it you never know for sure.

If you feel ok about your control I think that's great but I'm not a good enough trainer to trust my dogs 100% of the time.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> To me when folk think there is only one way to the exclusion of others that is religious fervor.


I never said there was no other way, now, did I? 
I keep saying, "train your dogs how you want", this is how _I_ work with *SHELTER/RESCUE *dogs which is what this thread is about. 

One could point out you are seemingly refusing to believe positive training methods work (well enough for your own dogs) and actually compare that to people who "think there's only one way".


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> The thing is...I've learned what "works" and what "doesn't work" and punishing dogs for doing dog things does not work. Rewarding them for doing what we want them to do, *and ignoring the things we don't want them to do* works much better. It's just how we do, by observing and learning, it's not like we set out saying to ourselves, "we'll never punish, we'll always reward", etc. It just happened that it worked better when we trained using the latter.


*That is absolutely frightening!* You would ignore a dog that is jumping on a 90 year old person or small child? You would ignore a dog that is charging a fence barking and snarling as a mother passes by with her baby in a stroller that is wailing at the top of its lungs because it is terrified of the dog? You would ignore a dog lunging at a cat or another dog with undesireable intentions? 

Your own dog or a rescue does not matter, there are simply behaviors that can never be ignored, to do so is simply irresponsible and is not acceptable.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Um...I do not place them in those situations...!?
They are shelter dogs/rescued dogs and this is where their training is taking place - not near babies, small children or 90 yr. olds!

LOL wow!

BTW, we were speaking about jumping and leash pulling, not aggression :thumbup:


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

shepherdmom said:


> Not only that... those of us who are just trying to help often get jumped. I've had shepherds for 25 years. I'm not a trainer, or an expert by any means but if someone says how do you stop a puppy from jumping I would say you know what worked for me was to put my knee up and say no every time the dog tries jumping. *There are several people on here who would tear into me for saying that. It may not be positive reinforcement or what ever the current political correct term is, but my dogs don't jump on people. They are not hurt in any way. It may not be your method, but it works for me so why is it necessary to be so derogatory when I share my ideas*?


Please don't think you're the only one who goes through that. I regularly see posters who promote Positive training treated that way. 

I think that positive training works best and would not use a correction collar now, even though I have in the past. There are threads on here were I have adviced against using a prong or a shock collar for very valid reasons, and felt ganged up on and bullied. 

It's like I'm saying that people who use prongs are evil - I'm not - but they do not work in all circumstances and can make some dogs behaviour worse. That being said, with the new training aids available now, and the new methods of training I don't see the need for them. 

I don't like correction collars because an adult rescue we took on practically choked himself on a choke chain trying to get to other dogs - and other forms of correction didn't help either. I found positive methods worked better. Whenever I mention about the choker I am told it's because I didn't use it properly, or at the right time - and nothing is going to make some people believe otherwise. Until I had that dog - I had no problems with a choke chains either - but now I understand the damage that could be done. And IMO the majority of dog owners (not forum members) do not know how to use them correctly - they don't even know how to put them on correctly. - and I reckon the same goes for prong collars. 

And whatever else I say - I'd better not admit I let you dog make his own choices (choices I've guided them to admittedly). I'm really derided for that. 

What really surprises me on this forum is whenever someone comes on here asking about shock collars, or says they use a shock collar, apart from shock collar fans, no-one else seems to give an opinion. 
Why is that - can someone tell me? Is it because everyone thinks they're a useful train tool - or are others too worried about voicing an opinion on them?
__________
Sue


----------



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

msvette2u said:


> I never said there was no other way, now, did I?
> I keep saying, "train your dogs how you want", this is how _I_ work with *SHELTER/RESCUE *dogs which is what this thread is about.
> 
> One could point out you are seemingly refusing to believe positive training methods work (well enough for your own dogs) and actually compare that to people who "think there's only one way".


Where did I say positive methods don't work? 

I personally don't believe they work in all cases on all dogs. That's it.

I use them (positive methods) and have said so over and over. I also use corrections on occasion. Not very complicated.


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

Jack's Dad said:


> Where did I say positive methods don't work?
> 
> I personally don't believe they work in all cases on all dogs. That's it.
> 
> *I use them (positive methods) and have said so over and over. I also use corrections on occasion.* Not very complicated.


I imagine most of us do that. 
__________
Sue


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Um...I do not place them in those situations...!?
> They are shelter dogs/rescued dogs and this is where their training is taking place - not near babies, small children or 90 yr. olds!
> 
> LOL wow!
> ...


It is still not appropriate for a dog to jump on an elderly person or a toddler. Some foster/new homes have one or the other or both. Ignoring the behavior would not be acceptable.

Remove snarling from the picture and you have a dog barking at a mother and baby passing your house, frightenening the child. You cannot control who walks past your house when the dog is outside. Ignoring this behavior is not acceptable.

Dogs pulling on leashes to get to cats and other dogs or deer, aggressive or not, is not to be ignored. 

You might have the facilities to isolate your rescued dogs from real life, but most foster and/or new homes do not. In your exceptional circumstance, your method of ignoring bad behavior may be viable. But to advocate it to other dog owners, even homes where you may be placing your rescues....well, sorry, I do not see it as being realistic, but more importantly, could lead to the failure of the adoption. Most people are just not going to ignore or tolerate bad behavior, nor should they, especially when a simple stern no just might do the trick.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

We do not ignore bad behavior and I have no clue where you get those ideas.
I'm not going to take these dogs to day cares or long-term care facilities, and we do not adopt dogs to people who expect them to be around small kids, because we do not have small children to "test" them with, so I will not subject families to them without that benefit. 

Not sure why your combative tone in this thread??

The scenarios you give won't take place and we don't adopt dogs to homes that would let those things take place, and generally our adopters get the dogs into training within weeks of adoption, to build upon the foundation we've given them :thumbup:

Oh, and we don't tell people not to tell a dog "no", but the scenarios you give also would require much more than a "no", should they actually occur. Redirection works wonders.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> The thing is...I've learned what "works" and what "doesn't work" and punishing dogs for doing dog things does not work. Rewarding them for doing what we want them to do, *and ignoring the things we don't want them to do* works much better. It's just how we do, by observing and learning, it's not like we set out saying to ourselves, "we'll never punish, we'll always reward", etc. It just happened that it worked better when we trained using the latter.


Sorry, not trying to be combative.

I am only commenting on what you wrote.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

I would like to comment regarding this topic, since I have actually had to deal with volunteer/foster parents in just such situations as described in the OP.

I am a firm believer in the notion that there is no "one size fits all" approach to training dogs. Successful training spread out over multiple dogs requires having different tools available in your training tool box. Sure there are some dogs that do very well with the traditional yank and crank style of training, and there are other dogs that do fantastically with positive only training. But that doesn't mean that either method will work just as well on ALL dogs. At least, this is what I think.

Now, in the work that I did for the humane society, I was often the staff person that front desk employees came to when they saw volunteer dog walkers or foster parents "training" in the shelter lobby or hallways in a way that they didn't agree with. The volunteer dog walkers weren't my responsibility, but the shelter was often without s volunteer coordinator, so the employees came to the foster office.

The thing is, that often the person was using a method of training that they had little or no understanding of. They had seen a clip on YouTube, or watched an episode of Cesar Milan, or bought a DVD at PetSmart and were now using a method in a way that might have been filtered through their faulty understanding of what they should be doing. They might be using a harsh lease correction that their own dog took without a flinch, but on the soft, stressed shelter dog was causing screaming and alligator rolls on the floor. In front of the general public.

Which is a point that can't be stressed enough. Even if a method is being used appropriately, if you are a organization that relies on public goodwill and donations, having even one complaint from the little old lady standing in the lobby while she waits for her the receipt on the used litter pans she just donated is one complaint too many. The volunteer in question will be asked to not do that anymore. It doesn't matter what you're trying to accomplish or how qualified (or not) you are to do it. Perception is everything.

I did fire a foster parent for being a know it all who knew very little. He had adopted a young GSP from our shelter about 6 months previously and had used some pretty heavy handed, compulsion training on the dog. He applied to be a foster parent and was approved. He took his first foster home, and immediately tried to put this foster in a down-stay in his open doorway. He would give a harsh leash correction if the dog started to break the down-stay. Dog turned and bit him, took off through the open doorway and was turned into the shelter later that day by a Good Samaritan who found it running stray, trailing the leash. This guy didn't know what he didn't know and would not take direction. At all. So I fired him. It worked with one dog, it would work with all dogs as far as he was concerned. 

My point with that story is that for every volunteer who actually knows what they are doing when it comes to dog training skills, there are three more just like this guy. And it is this guy and all the others like him that drive the rules and policies about training that so many shelters and rescues use to mitigate the damage that guys like this can do. 

Unless you are well known within the community as a professional dog trainer, and your methods are in line with the overall belief system of the organization, you could easily be limited to what you are allowed to do. Especially in public, in the lobby. 

OP, if you are a professional dog trainer, put together a resume for the shelter director and introduce yourself. Offer to give a demonstration to the administrative staff and see if you can implement your training protocol shelter wide. Offer weekly classes for foster dogs. Offer to train the dog walkers. 

If you're not a professional, try not to take it personally and either accept the restrictions placed on training methods or decide that you can't accept them and go your own way.
Sheilah


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Falkosmom said:


> Sorry, not trying to be combative.
> 
> I am only commenting on what you wrote.


I think you misunderstood. We've had this exact conversation so many times on this board that msvette probably didn't realize that she needed to be more specific or people might not know what she meant. 

Some behavior you can ignore and it will extinguish, without the risk of harming anyone (attention barking is a perfect example of this - if they don't get attention for barking, but they DO get attention for stopping barking, sitting calmly and making eye contact, they're eventually going to stop being such an annoying pest because it's not working to get what they want!) but you don't just ignore a dog jumping on a child or elderly person. 

The other part of the equation is management - setting up the dog to succeed by preventing them from practicing bad behavior while you train an alternate, incompatible behavior. If your dog doesn't know not to jump, or you haven't taught a polite sit as an automatic greeting behavior, then the dog would be on leash, so they CAN'T jump. You don't just stand by and let them run rampant. 

As I said, this has been explained over and over again in previous threads.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Falkosmom said:


> Sorry, not trying to be combative.
> 
> I am only commenting on what you wrote.


You took my post completely out of context. We were speaking of what the OP originally posted about - jumping up and pulling on leashes/not walking nicely on a lead.
Both those can be easily managed positively, without prongs, chokes, or knees to the chest and it was that to which I was speaking - we train and prefer new owners to train using ignoring methods which include turning away/ignoring, and changing directions, etc. to curb leash pulling.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

sit said:


> Unless you are well known within the community as a professional dog trainer, and your methods are in line with the overall belief system of the organization, you could easily be limited to what you are allowed to do. Especially in public, in the lobby.
> 
> If you're not a professional, try not to take it personally and either accept the restrictions placed on training methods or decide that you can't accept them and go your own way.
> Sheilah


 
You raise some good points. I didn't really think about the fact that there are 'know it alls' or cesar millan wannabes out there who have probably never handled a dog in their life,but see a 60 minute show and think they can apply the same techniques. I didn't think people were that dumb


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Oh yes they do.
We hear it _all t_he time "We're' Caesar fans!" 
Yes folks, despite the warnings "don't try this at home" people still will and do.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Gharrissc said:


> You raise some good points. I didn't really think about the fact that there are 'know it alls' or cesar millan wannabes out there who have probably never handled a dog in their life,but see a 60 minute show and think they can apply the same techniques. I didn't think people were that dumb


sit, stay's whole post was excellent and I hope that everyone who is commenting on this thread reads it. 

Yes, people are that dumb.  I had a lady give my 9.5 yo GSD foster a leash correction for not sitting on command. Old dog, bad hips, the whole deal, plus not always the most biddable girl in the world after having taken care of a human for the first 9 or so years of her life and thinking she would need to be in control. Thankfully my foster did not go up the leash, because she could have, just looked at her like "Really?" and walked off. :wub:

Anyway, sit, stay's whole post was excellent and I hope that everyone who is commenting on this thread reads it.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

I'd rather take a newbie owner who is open to suggestions over the best home in the world who won't listen to any suggestions and thinks "they know how to train" dogs, using outdated and harsh methods - for the reasons listed above.

And if I had a dime for every person who thought you train "sit" by shoving down on the dog's back/rear end, I'd be rich.
I take a treat - or heck, my hand alone with no treat - step into the dog slightly, hold hand over nose and move it back, and give the sit command. When dog sits, YAYAY, what a GOOD DOG! 
Or catch them sitting on their own and reward it. Pats, praise, or treats, whatever is handy.
People are freaking amazed when I show them that!!!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> To me when folk think there is only one way to the exclusion of others that is religious fervor.
> 
> Selzer:
> 
> ...


So far we have not kicked up a deer. Deer around here wait until twilight and then jump in front of my vehicles, because we hunt 'em and eat 'em. In my sister's neighborhood, deer roam around like they own the place, and I suppose they do (no hunting). I would have no trouble proofing a dog around deer there. But here, not happening.

I do kick up rabbits now and again, and a quick word will stop the dog in its tracks and it will come back to me. I'm not sure, but I think it would work on deer too.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> I'd rather take a newbie owner who is open to suggestions over the best home in the world who won't listen to any suggestions and thinks "they know how to train" dogs, using outdated and harsh methods - for the reasons listed above.


So who decides what is outdated and harsh? Because I put my knee up and say no to a jumping dog does that mean I'm not an acceptable home and couldn't adopt one of your dogs?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> So far we have not kicked up a deer. Deer around here wait until twilight and then jump in front of my vehicles, because we hunt 'em and eat 'em. In my sister's neighborhood, deer roam around like they own the place, and I suppose they do (no hunting). I would have no trouble proofing a dog around deer there. But here, not happening.
> 
> I do kick up rabbits now and again, and *a quick word will stop the dog in its tracks and it will come back to me.* I'm not sure, but I think it would work on deer too.


 
That would be cool to see - a quick word to take a dog off a hot track and visual chase.

Very unusual but interesting to see.


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

I didn't read through all ten pages, but I figured I'd chime in anyway...

I know exactly how so many shelters/rescues can be... especially in the application process for fostering or adoption... can't talk about chains or prongs or discipline or you'll be nixed.. I feel like that's because many of these shelters don't have a lot of resources and KNOW that food won't HURT a dog, while prongs, chains, collars, etc. could be used very wrongly and they don't have the knowledge/skill/time to teach all of the fosters, volunteers, or adopters how to use them correctly.

At the rescue where I work, we use prong collars on all but two dogs, using corrections if need be, we use electric "shock" collars on about a quarter of the dogs, and we also use food or toys and the clicker for positive reinforcement of basic obedience and slow behavior modification, and I enjoy that we CAN use numerous methods & be trained to use them correctly, and that they yeild positive results when used together properly.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I haven't read through this thread but I just started fostering for a rescue. My fosters are going to be puppies and younger/rambunctious dogs. They didn't ask what specific tools and methods I used and I didn't really offer the info because it depends on the dog. They asked me to foster the younger, more wild dogs based on my experience training and using a wide range of tools and methods. If the rescue wanted to micro-manage I'd probably just move on. Either my training and experience speaks for itself or it doesn't. At some point they have to just trust why they picked me to help out.


----------



## San (Mar 22, 2012)

Hubby and I started fostering for a GSD rescue about 7 months ago. Our own GSD has been exposed to prong and e-collar, but 90 to 95% of her training is done with motivational training, with treats/tug/ball. I use prong and e-collar for proofing only. 

Our rescue wants all fosters to be on a prong collar when outside of foster family's property. I train my fosters with motivational training as much as I can, and will use compulsion to proof it if necessary. 

That being said, I do give my fosters a lot more slack than I do my own dogs, simply because they usually came from unstable backgrounds, and/or have been through several homes, whereas my own dogs have not. 

Our first foster was a 1-2 yo male GSD, very active and mischievous. He learned to jump over our 6-ft privacy fence. My husband was with him the first time, hubby came into the house to grab more poop bags, he was gone by the time hubby went back into the yard. Luckily he came back when hubby called him. The second time, hubby was in the yard with him, hubby turned around to untangle our water hose, heard some sounds, looked back, and the GSD already had one paw on the top of our fence. Hubby called him and he came right back to my husband. If this were our own dog (none of our dogs has done that), we would've put an e-collar on him and make sure he did not try it again. But this was our foster (that was his fifth month with us), so I emailed the foster coordinator and asked what the rescue wanted us to do. Told her I wanted to use an e-collar to nip it in the bud, I don't want it to be a problem in his new home, I also told her that I would be okay with it if they didn't want us to use an e-collar, we would just manage it by keeping an eye on him all the time and have him on a long line when he is in our yard. Our rescue was okay with using the e-collar. The foster was adopted during his e-collar conditioning period so we never used it on him. The new adopter was told of this issue and was willing to work on it with a local trainer. 

Our current foster is a rambunctious 1 yo male, not crate-trained. The first week we had him, he barked for hours in his crate, hubby and I barely got any sleep. We could've easily put a bark collar on him, but we didn't. He had already been adopted twice and returned twice. The dog has had no structure in his life, so we feel that it is unfair to punish him for things he was never taught. We played crate games with him. We made sure he had plenty of mental and physical exercises daily so he would be tired when he went to his crate. Over time, he learned to accept his crate more and more

I told our rescue during the interview that all my dogs were on raw, should they disagree, I would put my foster on a kibble. The way I see it, I take my own feelings out of the equation. I am taking a foster under my wings on behalf of an organization, my actions have to be reflective of the rescue's principles and policies, which I have to abide by. Should I disagree or feel that I am unable to abide by these policies, then I would join another organization that I am comfortable with, but I am not going to ask the rescue to bend its policies for me.

I also feel if I make a mistake with PR-based training, it can usually be pretty easily fixed, but if I make a mistake with compulsion-based training, the new adopter may have a hard time reversing it. E-collar is a great training tool when used properly. We belong to a protections sports club, almost all of our club members use e-collars, but these are OUR dogs, if we make a mistake, we live with the consequences, but if I make a mistake on a foster by using too much compulsion or not condition a foster to a training collar properly, the adopter will have to live with the consequences.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

codmaster said:


> That would be cool to see - a quick word to take a dog off a hot track and visual chase.
> 
> Very unusual but interesting to see.


More than one of my girls have kicked up rabbits, started to chase and came right back to me at a word. They were heeling off-lead, and I do not work them off-lead until I feel they are ready. They broke the heel, but left off chasing the moment I spoke, and I spoke quickly. 

I also let them run out to my car in the front yard when I am going to take them somewhere. Occasionally, we have Amish driving down the road, so a word has to keep them from chasing the horse and buggy. It does. But I think they accept the horses more than they might a deer or rabbit. Wild game is like pirate treasure, whoever finds it can claim it.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

selzer said:


> More than one of my girls have kicked up rabbits, started to chase and came right back to me at a word. They were heeling off-lead, and I do not work them off-lead until I feel they are ready. They broke the heel, but left off chasing the moment I spoke, and I spoke quickly.


 
I think a lot more people need to see that in order to realize how important a solid recall is.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Gharrissc said:


> I think a lot more people need to see that in order to realize how important a solid recall is.


 
A great place for "Proofing", heh? 

A true test of a recall!

Based on what I have seen under even remotally similar circumstances, the VAST majority of even "trained" dogs would not recall properly even with multiple commands!

JMHO, of course!


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

shepherdmom said:


> So who decides what is outdated and harsh? Because I put my knee up and say no to a jumping dog does that mean I'm not an acceptable home and couldn't adopt one of your dogs?


There are new, better ways to do things, which are more effective. 
If potential owners don't want to explore them, then yes, we often decline and choose a home open to suggestions.
But we do give people a choice - "are you open to suggestions" on foods and methods of discipline, which means it's the potential adopter's choice to either work with us or not :shrug:


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I got to thinking about this thread earlier.
> What sit-stay said made a lot of sense and I got to thinking about impressions we make upon adopters, and also the public in general. (As a for instance - another area rescue was headed to an adoption event and they had one of the larger foster dogs in the back of their pickup, with no crate, or any tie down or anything, which is _illegal_ in our state, not to mention quite dangerous! And the impression I got, anyway, was that they just don't care. About laws, or safety of these animals!!)
> 
> And I think part of the reason we don't - and shelters often don't - recommend prongs or a lot of heavy aversion training methods - is that people do not want to do this with their dogs! And if all I did was resort to physical discipline to get my point across to a dog, what will they do in their new homes, when the owners do not want to resort to physical punishment and the like?
> ...


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

"
Originally Posted by *shepherdmom*  
_So who decides what is outdated and harsh? Because I put my knee up and say no to a jumping dog does that mean I'm not an acceptable home and couldn't adopt one of your dogs?"_




msvette2u said:


> There are new, better ways to do things, which are more effective.
> If potential owners don't want to explore them, then yes, we often decline and choose a home open to suggestions.
> *I.E. "Your Way or the Highway!" Heh? You must keep an eye on the adopter afterwards as well, I assume. Only question would be for how long after the adoption does the new owner have to follow "the party line" or will you snatch the dog back? *
> But we do give people a choice - "are you open to suggestions" on foods and methods of discipline, which means it's the potential adopter's choice to either work with us or not :shrug:


 *OMG!*

So please end the suspense - what is a "*better"* technique to stop jumping up than holding your knee out and letting the dog bump himself into it, and combine that with a voice of surprise when he does it and then great praise when the dog realizes that he shouldn't jump on people and that he gets rewarded when he doesn't jump! 

This did work very well for me for a LOT of dogs. And my dogs still are very friendly and social and seem to still love me!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> > I got to thinking about this thread earlier.
> > What sit-stay said made a lot of sense and I got to thinking about impressions we make upon adopters, and also the public in general. (As a for instance - another area rescue was headed to an adoption event and they had one of the larger foster dogs in the back of their pickup, with no crate, or any tie down or anything, which is _illegal_ in our state, not to mention quite dangerous! And the impression I got, anyway, was that they just don't care. About laws, or safety of these animals!!)
> >
> > And I think part of the reason we don't - and shelters often don't - recommend prongs or a lot of heavy aversion training methods - is that people do not want to do this with their dogs! And if all I did was resort to physical discipline to get my point across to a dog, what will they do in their new homes, when the owners do not want to resort to physical punishment and the like?
> ...


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

What testing? Well they came over and visited for a few hours while I observed interactions. I saw nothing dangerous about the situation at all and neither did the mother who did come along too 

And just because the dog is growling does not mean she's aggressive - if she had snapped or bitten (neither occurred) we'd have taken her back. 
In fact we offered to take the dog back as soon as we knew there was an issue.
But no, mom said she loves the dog already so they are working on it. 
So I gave them suggestions, and it's working. 

So your theory of her being aggressive is really not going to hold water here. 
Getting used to the home and settling in, yes, but no, not aggressive or we'd not be having this conversation 



> Wouldn't the child have to "walk by" or "get close to" the dog in order to hand feed the dog? Dog didn't growl then, I suppose?


What part of "no growling today" and doing wonderful did you miss? Because that's exactly what happened. The dog and she are now buddies.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I.E. "Your Way or the Highway!" Heh?


Although your highly derisive tone hardly warrants a reply, I will do so - and then that's it for this type post. 

Yes, it _is _"our way" or the highway. When you save a dog's life that has been horridly abused and neglected, _you _get to make the rules about what kind of home it needs.
And if all a home has to offer is more roughing the dog up, then no, we will not let them have the dog. See, they've already been through this - in fact it's been said over and over in this thread - these dogs have been subjected to the worst man (or woman) has to offer and it failed. 
So why should I send it back to a home that is going to use the same failed methods over and over??
When the dog is exposed to positive training, it blossoms, literally. It's potential is unlocked instead of crammed back inside. 

So yeah. It's "our way" or they can go get a freebie off Craigslist or go to a shelter with no requirements or commitments on the owner's part. 

And if you don't like how we do things, start a rescue of your own from the ground up and do it how you like. Stop trying to find fault with others who are doing it already!


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> There are new, better ways to do things, which are more effective.
> If potential owners don't want to explore them, then yes, we often decline and choose a home open to suggestions.


I'm thankful that not all rescues think like that. Because according to you, even though I have a 25+ year proven record of healthy, happy, well trained dogs, even though my dogs get regular food, health care, exercise, training, medical attention and a loving family home.. I would be turned down because my training is old fashioned and your think your way is somehow better and more effective than mine?  Tell me how is that in the best interest of the dogs? I thought rescues were about finding a dog a good home?


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I thought rescues were about finding a dog a good home?


Yes, and that's what we do - each and every time 
Do you think owners who use positive training methods don't _vet_ their dogs?  Or provide health care, and all the other things you mentioned??

PS - _if you don't like how we do things, start a rescue of your own from the ground up and do it how you like. Stop trying to find fault with others who are doing it already!_


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Yes, it _is _"our way" or the highway. When you save a dog's life that has been horridly abused and neglected, _you _get to make the rules about what kind of home it needs.
> And if all a home has to offer is more roughing the dog up, then no, we will not let them have the dog. See, they've already been through this - in fact it's been said over and over in this thread - these dogs have been subjected to the worst man (or woman) has to offer and it failed.
> So why should I send it back to a home that is going to use the same failed methods over and over??


So now you are comparing old fashioned training methods to those who abuse and neglect dogs.... Seriously??!!!


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> Yes, and that's what we do - each and every time
> Do you think owners who use positive training methods don't _vet_ their dogs?  Or provide health care, and all the other things you mentioned??


and you have enough of these people that use positive training methods that your shelter is empty and you have no more dogs looking for a home? Amazing. 

As for starting my own rescue... Why would I do that? There are plenty of good rescues that I can and do donate time and money to help. Places that care about animals rather than about snotty hypacritical standards.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

msvette2u said:


> What testing? Well they came over and visited for a few hours while I observed interactions. I saw nothing dangerous about the situation at all and neither did the mother who did come along too  *I guess that I must agree with you - after all, what could be "dangerous" about a dog growling at a child who happened to walk too close to the dog, right? BTW, what do you think a lot of dogs do when they growl and the growl is ignored? Or do you just think that an 8 and/or 12 yo child should know better than to ignore a growl and that they should just get away from the dog who is growling.*
> 
> And just because the dog is growling does not mean she's aggressive *(just what the heck do you think that growling means?* A threat of a bite? or just ?????? - if she had snapped or bitten (neither occurred) we'd have taken her back. *Don't you think that that might have been just a little too late when a young child is involved? NAA - it is wonderful what a good plastic surgeon can do nowadays, isn't it? Be serious! Would you risk your little girl 9or boy) to go next to a dog who has growled at them (more than once or did the dog only growl once did you say?)*
> In fact we offered to take the dog back as soon as we knew there was an issue. *That was very nice of you! But it wasn't an issue, was it? Just a dog growling at a kid because she walked to close to the dog. Nothing there!*
> ...


That is so wonderful about the kid and the dog - great payoff for the bet that the parents took with the dog and their child. Were you there to supervise or did the parents decide to take the chance with a dog that growled at their little girl just because she walked by the dog (how close was the child to the dog, did you say?)

*Little defensive, eh?* Not to worry, that would be very expected for most folks.

You do work for the org where these parents got the dog, right?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

shepherdmom said:


> and you have enough of these people that use positive training methods that your shelter is empty and you have no more dogs looking for a home? Amazing.
> 
> As for starting my own rescue... Why would I do that? There are plenty of good rescues that I can and do donate time and money to help. Places that care about animals rather than about *snotty hypacritical standards.*





What they said!

And don't forget, they cure a growling dog just by having little kids hand feed it. That is truly amazing, I think!


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Whoops typo. "*hypacritical* "Should be hypocritical.* :blush:*


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Codmaster: heheheheheee. good comment...
Heck, guess I have been training all wrong, that must be why my dogs don't have aggressive issues, why they don't growl at people, especially kids, why they act like dogs... play like dogs and get treated like dogs and in turn I know they are not 100% perfect at recalls and therefore do not place them in situations where they can get hurt or shot.
My training methods must not work. Darn.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

So you bring in adult (over 1yr. of age) dogs that never lived with kids and expect them to behave 100% immediately? Wow. 

And what are your "training methods", Cod, et. al, if they don't? If they growl?
Not a bite, or even a snap, mind you, but a growl - out of apprehension quite likely since the dog never lived around kids before?

Oh, that's right, the ol' lead injection out back behind the barn...


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

As usual, people insist on comparing dogs that they've raised from puppyhood, to a dog with an uncertain backround who came from a shelter or rescue as an adult. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that these dogs might need to be treated differently, at least at first?


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

msvette, if you are commenting on my comment about getting shot, I meant letting a dog offleash in a situation where game is... Or chasing horses. Around here, that means getting shot by someone. I can't beleive that anyone's dog is 100% perfect on recalls when chasing something.
I have a hard time believeing when anyone says their dog is 100% perfect at anything, they are dogs and therefore make mistakes just like a human is not 100% perfect at everything. Anything with a brain will do something wrong at some times.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> As usual, people insist on comparing dogs that they've raised from puppyhood, to a dog with an uncertain backround who came from a shelter or rescue as an adult. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that these dogs might need to be treated differently, at least at first?


Oh yeah, same ol' song.
You know, I am extremely pleased with Koda in her new home. She's already loving on the little girl, and it didn't take punishment to do it. 
This dog came from an uncertain background and the mom had her heart set on the dog, and for them _and_ for Koda, it's working out, I fail to see how that's a bad thing or something to take a sneering tone over :shrug:
In fact the only thing certain is their owner died, and she and her mom (or sister) wound up tied to a tree in a yard for 3mos. It's a success story for her, for sure. 

Oh, and we stand by ready to take her back if at any time the mom feels it's "not safe", since she's there (in Seattle) and we're 200 miles away, I'll trust her judgement when it comes to the safety of her child.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> As usual, people insist on comparing dogs that they've raised from puppyhood, to a dog with an uncertain backround who came from a shelter or rescue as an adult. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that these dogs might need to be treated differently, at least at first?


Why is it so hard for people to understand we are talking about rescue dogs? I got Kioshi at 5 from the Akita Rescue Society. (abused and chained in a backyard) I got Harley at 2 (starved and ignored) from a Great Dane Rescue. I got Duffy age unknown from a mixed breed rescue and we saved Xena from the desert in Arizona where she was left with no water. You want to talk resource guarding issues. She slept in her water bowl for the first month we had her. But apparently I don't know how to manage or raise dogs because I think positive only is a bunch of hooey!


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> But apparently I don't know how to manage or raise dogs because I think positive only is a bunch of hooey!


WHY are you taking this so personal!?? We didn't decline an application on you, if I remember right, you didn't even send one in, we both decided the distance would be too great. 
So why on God's green earth is anyone in this thread mad over a rescue or shelter's decision to go with positive reinforcement? 

I mean seriously. I really don't care what anyone does with their dogs. 
We will _always_ do what works. 
If it's not working we will try something else, but we will _always_ do what works and since Positive reinforcement works with every dog we've had here, that's what we'll do! Why? Again - _because it works. _

You do with your pets what you want, nobody is telling you not to (general YOU).


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Why can't everyone just realize that not every method will work for every dog. Realize a different method does not mean abuse or letting the dog do whatever he/she wants. And most importantly, realize you don't need to defend your method or yourself to the ninth degree to a bunch of strangers online.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

I agree totally. It's just that knowing some of the dogs here (esp. this Golden) a leash pop or penny can thrown at her - and I'm not talking about anyone here, just different methods mentioned on returned applications - would break her heart and her psyche. 
Yesterday, had a gal write and say for potty accidents they "bop the dog under the chin then make it sit in time out". Things like that - we will avoid at all costs.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> *Why can't everyone just realize that not every method will work for every dog.* ................


 
*Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



*Probably because this is such an emotional subject for some folks!*


----------



## Shade (Feb 20, 2012)

Jax08 said:


> Why can't everyone just realize that not every method will work for every dog. Realize a different method does not mean abuse or letting the dog do whatever he/she wants. And most importantly, realize you don't need to defend your method or yourself to the ninth degree to a bunch of strangers online.


Exactly! 

We're all here to give and receive advice, that's the purpose of this forum


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> Why can't everyone just realize that not every method will work for every dog. Realize a different method does not mean abuse or letting the dog do whatever he/she wants. And most importantly, realize you don't need to defend your method or yourself to the ninth degree to a bunch of strangers online.


Not every method works for a handler either. Some training methods may come more naturally to me, while some might be a bit more difficult.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Lilie said:


> Not every method works for a handler either. Some training methods may come more naturally to me, while some might be a bit more difficult.


Exactly. I watched one lady with NO personality doing a CGC test with her dog. Literally, no personality, no animation, no character. The dog was all over the place on everything else that was more interesting. How does a person like that go make a fool of themselves building a dog's drive up with a toy? Gotta go find another way.


----------



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

Jax08 said:


> Why can't everyone just realize that not every method will work for every dog. Realize a different method does not mean abuse or letting the dog do whatever he/she wants. And most importantly, realize you don't need to defend your method or yourself to the ninth degree to a bunch of strangers online.


 I agree with this Jax. The broader issue though is what are rescues for?

Are they to place as many dogs as they can in good homes or to put up so many restrictions that many of us would not qualify.

Eveyone who has posted has raised, trained and loved many dogs over the years but what we are hearing is that we are not good enough by someone elses standards for their rescue dogs.

That's ok a rescue has a right to set any standards they want. They need to realize though that if they are too set on their rules they are eliminating a lot of what could be good homes.

So how many dogs are put to sleep in shelters that might have been rescued if the requirements weren't quite so strict.

If I or someone else is not allowed a rescue because we might put up a knee to keep the dog from jumping up then how many dogs may lose their life while the rescue is waiting for the "appropriate" adopter.

I'm a big picture guy when it comes to these issues.

Lets say hypothetically a rescue adopted out ten dogs a month under strict requirements. Now how about they could adopt out fifteen if they weren't quite so strict. That just makes better sense to me in the big picture.

I would own a rescue right now instead of my 9 month old puppy but I grew so weary of some of the rescues BS I decide I would rather raise my own.

I love her but I would have loved a rescue as well.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> Are they to place as many dogs as they can in good homes


No.
That's what shelters are for. Rescues have more leeway, and choose homes based upon the best match for this or that particular dog. 
Because - we strive for lifelong placements, not an "until I get bored of it" placement. Shelters are always doing this and often we're cleaning up that mess too.



> So how many dogs are put to sleep in shelters that might have been rescued if the requirements weren't quite so strict.


None here - again, we're a _rescue_ not a _shelter_. Shelters PTS. Rescues don't, we don't anyway, except for temperament issues or insurmountable health issues. 

If I adopt a dog out and someone gives it harsh corrections - of whatever sort - and the dog bites the person as a result of that (has and can happen easily!) what favors have I done anyone?

BTW, if people are open to training methods, I will not decline an adoption, it's when they are set in their ways and their way is the only way for every dog, that I decline an adoption. 
The choice is the adopters at that point


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

As the "foster parent" I get the final say in placing the dog. I place the dog based on aspects of fit that I can't really describe. It's not about training methods and tools but carefully observed interaction between the potential family (including kids and dogs in the household). The puppy we placed last week was just an absolutely perfect fit and we were not sitting there discussing how to deal with counter surfing or potty training. That dog was born to be placed with that family and regardless of nitpicking over training methods I will stand by the placement.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Jack's Dad said:


> I agree with this Jax. The broader issue though is what are rescues for?


They are to rescue dogs from death and worse than death situation.



Jack's Dad said:


> Are they to place as many dogs as they can in good homes or to put up so many restrictions that many of us would not qualify.


Some of them have to many restrictions that kick the app out before really talking to the people

Rescues rehabilitate dogs. Rarely does a dog come through that doesn't have some baggage. Again, the training method needs to be what is right for the dog and the person.

I am a positive rewards based trainer with my dog. That doesn't mean there isn't a time and place for a correction. Sometimes a correction is needed to get their attention. Sometimes they may know the command backwards and forward and decide they are just going to blow you off. Very few things in life are black and white.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> The puppy we placed last week was just an absolutely perfect fit and we were not sitting there discussing how to deal with counter surfing or potty training.


I find many adopters simply don't know how to housebreak. We must give advice at those times, and/or have them talk to trainers or buy one of those little booklets they sell for new puppy owners. 

Once explained to them, they are relieved to find it's so simple. 

We do offer a lot of support and training advice (ongoing for the life of the dog), if people are unsure, we demonstrate, again, and it's made simple for them because of that.

Many if not all "common problems" in dogs can be curtailed by supervision, proper use of a crate, and attention.


----------



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

I don't know how your rescue operates msevette but the ones we looked into in California almost all pulled dogs that were going to be PTS from shelters.

So yes if the rescues I am talking about don't have room for whatever reason then dogs die somwhere else.

My opinion is if putting dogs in good homes is not enough then there is something wrong.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> My opinion is if putting dogs in good homes is not enough then there is something wrong.


...huh?
We place dogs in homes that match the dog's temperament. If you like to knee dogs in the chest, I'm not going to give you this Golden. If we get an 80lb. bone head lab, maybe, but not this Golden who was already abused in her former home, and yes, a knee to the chest on a dog like this is traumatizing - all she wants to do is please people and she has been subjected to physical corrections far too often already.

But if you say "Hey I'm open to any new/different training methods you got", you may just get the dog.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Where does this whole "knee to the chest" thing come from? You can effectively block a dog from jumping with your knee without touching them with your knee. If you are nailing your dog with your knee...then you are doing it incorrectly. I think comments like that, that completely misconstrue what is actually happening, is part of why these threads get so heated and defensive.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Jax08 said:


> Where does this whole "knee to the chest" thing come from? You can effectively block a dog from jumping with your knee without touching them with your knee. If you are nailing your dog with your knee...then you are doing it incorrectly. I think comments like that, that completely misconstrue what is actually happening, is part of why these threads get so heated and defensive.


Jax, it has been said over and over in this thread - not by me, by the ones who feel Positive "only" sucks. 
How do you teach a dog to stay down? Knee to the chest is what has been bandied about.

On page 1 "OR if they really persistent I will knee them."

On page 2 "A dog jumping on me is going to get a knee in the chest."

And with that, I'm outta here - headed to pick up our new couch/loveseat then to the vet's office to pick up dogs


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

msvette2u said:


> WHY are you taking this so personal!?? We didn't decline an application on you, if I remember right, you didn't even send one in, we both decided the distance would be too great.
> So why on God's green earth is anyone in this thread mad over a rescue or shelter's decision to go with positive reinforcement?


I'm taking it personal because I care just as much about animals as you do. 

I find it really sad for all the dogs that miss out on good homes because of attitudes that one way is better than another and I'm not speaking specifically of your rescue. 

Positive Reinforcement is a tool, just as corrections are a tool. Not every tool works every time. I just hate to see good dogs sitting in rescues when they could be with a family. Just because you or I don't agree with a particular method doesn't make it bad. I wouldn't turn down a person who said they were going to use PO training, and I just don't understand why a rescue would turn down help or people who use the occasional correction. I just find that really really tragic.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Then they are doing it incorrectly. The idea is to block them without touching them as touching them IS a reward in itself. Hand in the air, knee up to block them away from your body. Anyone purposely nailing their dogs with their knee is only teaching them that pain comes from wanting to be near them. 

Jax goes wild when I get home. AS a young dog, I put my hands in the air so she didnt' get a "touch"/attention by jumping and blocked her with my knee. Give her a Sit or just walk away from her without a word once she's back on all fours. Works like a charm.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

134 posts
1 Rescue represented
7 people who have actually volunteered and fosters

I'm going to say that the vast majority of rescues are NOT represented here and ALL of the rescues that I have been involved with use some sort of corrections whether it's a prong, voice or a citronella collar.

Given that info, the arguments for rescues being PO vs mixed training isn't very solid.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

It seems the one rescue who is represented on this thread is only seeing it as her way being the only way.
All dogs have different personalities.. Some dogs are darn near impossible to even give an evil eye to, they fall apart. Then some dogs you could hit over the head with a 2 x 4 and it would stand there and wag its tail... 
Some old time methods did more corrections than seen now. Bad?? not really, just the way it was done back then. Positive training? Not always the best way. I have seen dogs practically turning sideways while healing in an obedience class trying to do everything perfect, yet outside the ring, it would not mind the owner and did whatever it wanted. A performing dog so to speak.
Course, I am sorta old school. If a dog needs a correction, it will get it. Not beating, not abusing, but a quick correction. However, that does not mean physical. It might mean a knee up to make the dog back up, or pushing on the butt to make it sit. Not physical abuse, but what needs to be done for that dog at that instant.
Then again I am old school about children. Used to be if my mom gave me the look, or heaven forbid, took a hold of my ear when I was not behaving in a restaurant for instance, it only happened one time.. All my brothers and sisters were raised with a " one warning, then action". No abuse, not hitting, but if told to do something , you did it then, not in an hour or later on".
Now days, kids have no respect. Lets raise our kids with gentle positive reinforcement. No spanking, or anything, just lots of " please honey, do this for me and you will get a treat, please don't hit your brother and I will buy you something". Beg, barter and spoil. Yep, kids these days run rampant through restaurants while the parents sit and ignore them. Kids tear up the neighbors yard and the parents pay for it. Kids are given 27 warning and threats for everytime they are asked to do something, then they ignore it and the parents clean up the mess. 
Dogs are the same way. Beg, plead, make excuses, but don't ever ever give the dog a correction... Don't expect it to do anything except what it wants. 
Maybe going back to actual expectations for a dog to do what is asked when it is asked would prevent so many dogs in rescues with baggage.


----------



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

Jax08 said:


> 134 posts
> 1 Rescue represented
> 7 people who have actually volunteered and fosters
> 
> ...


Enlightening. Thanks for that Jax.

Msevette: When you come back, does your rescue ever pull dogs from shelters to keep them from being PTS. 
Many do and I stand by what I said. If rescues keep dogs looking for the adopters who will qualify under very strict rules then some shelter puts another to sleep.
Anyway, I get it you are content with your rescues guidelines.
You also have a good heart in the work that you do. 
I just disagree with some of the more strict guidelines that some rescues have. I think they are mising an opportunity to place more dogs in good but not perfect homes.


----------



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

wyominggrandma said:


> It seems the one rescue who is represented on this thread is only seeing it as her way being the only way.
> All dogs have different personalities.. Some dogs are darn near impossible to even give an evil eye to, they fall apart. Then some dogs you could hit over the head with a 2 x 4 and it would stand there and wag its tail...
> Some old time methods did more corrections than seen now. Bad?? not really, just the way it was done back then. Positive training? Not always the best way. I have seen dogs practically turning sideways while healing in an obedience class trying to do everything perfect, yet outside the ring, it would not mind the owner and did whatever it wanted. A performing dog so to speak.
> Course, I am sorta old school. If a dog needs a correction, it will get it. Not beating, not abusing, but a quick correction. However, that does not mean physical. It might mean a knee up to make the dog back up, or pushing on the butt to make it sit. Not physical abuse, but what needs to be done for that dog at that instant.
> ...


Great post IMO.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Rescues do have very strict requirements. But they aren't very hard to meet if it's a good home. Some require fences, others don't. ALL GOOD ONES will require references, a vet reference and a home check. What dog you get will be based on what your experience is. You may fall in love with one dog but not have the experience and knowledge to handle him/her. No rescue wants to put a dog in a home that is set up to fail.

Safety
Veterinary care
Well fed and cared for
People who can vouch for you and say the above three things are true...

Really not that hard to meet.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Andy can't speak for them all but my rescue does pull dogs from shelters. We get dogs that are at risk of being PTS, dogs that need medical care, dogs that have been given to the courts in neglect cases, and dogs that people just can't/don't want to keep for whatever reason.

Nothing on the application to adopt or foster is a deal-breaker. We mostly use common sense. 

When a dog is adopted, the money goes to the vet for the next dog. I adopted out a dog last week and the next day, put the cash on our rescue's account at the vet and mailed the president the receipt. The dog I had didn't require expensive medical care but the next dog (hernia and cherry eye) does.


----------



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

Liesje said:


> We mostly use common sense.


 

Your kidding aren't you? Why would you do a thing like that?


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Jax08 said:


> Rescues do have very strict requirements. But they aren't very hard to meet if it's a good home. Some require fences, others don't. ALL GOOD ONES will require references, a vet reference and a home check. What dog you get will be based on what your experience is. You may fall in love with one dog but not have the experience and knowledge to handle him/her. No rescue wants to put a dog in a home that is set up to fail.
> 
> Safety
> Veterinary care
> ...


Yes - and honestly, we get thanked for doing this often. 

Rescues are not responsible for the dogs in shelters, people who dump them there are. 

NOW - it used to be more people dumped dogs for reasons we would call stupid - don't want it anymore, got a better, newer dog, got a puppy now the old dog can go, doesn't match the new furniture, not trained, whatever...there are still those, but in addition, sadly, there are dogs and people who do not want to separate but cannot remain together for personal and financial reasons - more of those than before _in addition to_ the bad reasons. Sometimes those owners contact us directly and sometimes we can help. But when ONE shelter in KY is killing 1,000 dogs a month, can I fix that by adopting out fosters faster? Probably not, because my rapid placements will probably not be lifelong, so I am messing up more than I am helping. 

However, still not rescues' responsibility for any dogs in shelters - and the philosophy of most rescues is to place dogs in match homes using a process that they have found to yield the best results _for them_ - does not allow for wham, bam, thank you ma'am placements. 

For people who want to understand this better, you cannot do it from a computer - you really need to volunteer - maybe at a shelter, maybe for a rescue, but you cannot ever get it truly from a computer post. 

Within that - *and what the OP posted about and sit, stay answered so well many moons and posts ago*, are going to be differences in opinions and philosophies. So you look for your match there, too. Me - almost 9 years of fostering, 3 rescues...some more matchy than others. 

But again, impossible to know for sure from a computer, and more clear in person with a foster dog in hand.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Jack's Dad said:


> Your kidding aren't you? Why would you do a thing like that?


Why ever? 

And you know what, sometimes we make a mistake. The puppy I just fostered and got adopted was returned to the rescue by the original owner. I wasn't with them then so I don't know what happened or if it was a bad match from the beginning but we took the dog back and did right by him. The world continues to turn...


----------



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

Well Jean maybe I misunderstand the purpose of rescues.

I thought it was to save and place dogs in good homes. Not just any home but a good home.

I think myself and wyominggrandma and shepherds mom and codmaster could provide those homes. There are others but I don't want to look up all the names.

We could not adopt from msevette's rescue because we would not agree to the provision that requires Positive "Only" training.

So be it. They or any other rescue have that right.

Your right, rescues aren't responsible for all the dogs dumped and in shelters. 
Neither am I. I've never dumped a dog.
Neither are the shelters responsible for the influx of dogs.
So here we are back to square one.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Andy - Why are you back at square one? Jean didn't say any of you were bad homes and the rescues wouldn't adopt to you.

99.9% of rescues are NOT positive only trainer and require that of their adopters. So, what is the issue?


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well Jean maybe I misunderstand the purpose of rescues.
> 
> I thought it was to save and place dogs in good homes. Not just any home but a good home.
> 
> ...


I have been turned down by rescues. You're telling me I'm a bad owner? Ha! Personally I like what they are trying to do but I will never deal with them again. 

As for the training part. Every one of my dogs up until now has come from a shelter. I think just like in life, there has to be a balance. I don't agree with purely one thing or another.


----------



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

Jax08 said:


> Andy - Why are you back at square one? Jean didn't say any of you were bad homes and the rescues wouldn't adopt to you.
> 
> 99.9% of rescues are NOT positive only trainer and require that of their adopters. So, what is the issue?


Well she didn't seem to care much for my idea of relaxing the guideline a little to adopt more dogs out. 
You said it already we are mainly dealing with one person and their rescue.
I wish some other rescue people would respond so maybe we would get a more balanced view.
I used the PO as an example.
We looked into one rescue near us that was so strict on everything from food, exercise, where and in what the dog was to sleep, on and on.
I could have adopted a child from Romanis easier.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Some are very strict. Some are a bit fanatical, IMO. However, most rescues are not hard to deal with. I agree with Jean that the guidelines don't need to be relaxed, at least in the rescues I've dealt with. You aren't going to like everything about every rescue but for the most part they have their reasons for their rules. But nowhere did Jean even imply that any of you would not be good home. I think this thread might have people on the defensive and are reading to much into some of the posts.


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

DJEtzel said:


> I didn't read through all ten pages, but I figured I'd chime in anyway...
> I know exactly how so many shelters/rescues can be... especially in the application process for fostering or adoption... can't talk about chains or prongs or discipline or you'll be nixed.. *I feel like that's because many of these shelters don't have a lot of resources and KNOW that food won't HURT a dog, while prongs, chains, collars, etc. could be used very wrongly *and they don't have the knowledge/skill/time to teach all of the fosters, volunteers, or adopters how to use them correctly.
> 
> *At the rescue where I work, we use prong collars on all but two dogs, using corrections if need be, we use electric "shock" collars on about a quarter of the dogs,* and we also use food or toys and the clicker for positive reinforcement of basic obedience and slow behavior modification, and I enjoy that we CAN use numerous methods & be trained to use them correctly, and that they yeild positive results when used together properly.


The first bolded statement is correct - that's why it's not a good idea to promote the use of them. There are far too many people out there who end up abusing their dogs because they misuse such tools. 

Why not use kinder methods if they are just as efficient?

Perhaps you can explain why the rescue uses so many prong collars, and worse still, shock collars - surely that's encouraging the use of tools that used incorrectly can do untold damage to a dog. What problems are they used to deal with?

IMO it could be storing up problems that new owners further down the line have to deal with, or with the dogs ending up back in shelters.
__________
Sue


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well Jean maybe I misunderstand the purpose of rescues.
> 
> I thought it was to save and place dogs in good homes. Not just any home but a good home.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: That is their right and their dogs lose because we all make great doggie parents. We care. None of us would be here if we didn't.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

But the problem with not using some correction items to help these dogs is not being able to work with the dogs to help them get into homes. Prong collars are no vicious nor a torture item, it is a usefull tool, if needed, on some dogs. Shock collars are also that, a tool to be used. Just because a rescue or trainer uses it on the dog doesn't mean it will forever need that particular tool to continue on with life. It will not hurt the dog if used correctly.
Perfect example is the owners of horses who baby them. "I can't slap my horsie when he runs me over, I just try to not stand in the way and he won't do it. Slapping a horse hurts his feelings".. I hear this, as we are trying to work on a 1200 lb horse that is stomping on our toes, running us over, etc. A good hard slap to the neck make them pay attention to us puny humans and then we can bring them under control. Ever watch horses in a field? They kick, and bite each other for corrections.
Same as dogs. "I can't correct my dog, he won't like me anymore". " Its okay if he bites because the person who the dog bit might have " looked wrong, walked wrong, walked to fast, a child walked by, walked by his toy, just fill in the blanks....
Excuse me but if owners would be more responsible for what their dogs do, and quit making excuses, and quit working with trainers who won't ever give a correction, but instead give the dog treats, affection and treat the dog as a child, there would not be as many dogs given up for aggression, not minding, no control, etc. 
An owner has to make a dog understand that it is a dog and therefore has to be trained like a dog. Not a child, not a baby, but a dog..
Nope, I would probably be turned down for rescue adoption because I WILL expect my dogs to obey and mind and if that involves a true correction instead of babying and smooching and begging the dog to mind, then so be it.
But, I am a good owner, have a huge fenced yard and acreage, my dogs go with me, my dogs are well fed and have vet care, toys, beds, etc. They mind when I tell them to, they expect the day to day things to change in their lives and they accept it... But, if I have to make a correction and make it fit what is not being done at the time I ask for it, I will. Do my dogs hate me, not want to be with me, not give me kisses, bite the vet or anyone, not behave? nope, not a chance.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Jax08 said:


> Some are very strict. Some are a bit fanatical, IMO. However, most rescues are not hard to deal with. I agree with Jean that the guidelines don't need to be relaxed, at least in the rescues I've dealt with. You aren't going to like everything about every rescue but for the most part they have their reasons for their rules. But nowhere did Jean even imply that any of you would not be good home. I think this thread might have people on the defensive and are reading to much into some of the posts.


Yeah, what? 

I thought I was making a clear and reasonable comment about the philosophy of rescues (which vary) in terms of speed of adoption, based on their requirements (which vary) and explaining that rescues cannot be made to feel responsible for the deaths of dogs because they are not the ones doing this to them (and when they DO start to feel that way - that's often when the hoarding behaviors can kick in, or the burnout and they quit, or other negatives that do no one any good). 

I didn't reference anyone in this thread at all did I? Other than sit, stay and the OP. And saying Jax made sense. 

Huh. I am a little freaked out at the outrage here.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

I went to a trainer with my 4 month old puppy, wanted to work with someone other than myself, use new ideas, etc. Get her around other dogs. This particular trainer was used to GSD, had raised and trained them her whole life.Had been giving obedience classes for years with this particular club.
So here I go, with a happy go lucky 4 month old who loved everyone. She knew sit, down, stay, walk nicely, come, focus on me. Basic things that I wanted to work in company with, all trained with a flat collar.
This "trainer" spent the whole time insisting I jerk on her for looking at other things, that I let her out to 6 feet and then correct her for walking away, then praise her when she looked at me after I corrected her.. When we were resting, she was sitting beside me and some boys came up. They asked to pet her, I said yes. This trainer came rushing up, telling the boys about GSD being aggressive and could bite and to not get close to this puppy, that when she put her ears back and wagged her tail while they petted her, she was showing aggressive symptoms. 
I told this trainer what I thought of her methods and went home and did what I have always done.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Your posts were just fine Jean.... Good points and good thoughts. 
I think the comments made about some of us not being good homes was coming from msvetts opinions that if training was not done with the positive method, her way only,, her rescue would not consider some of us good homes. At least that is what I got from it.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Thanks. Whew. I thought I'd gotten on the wrong train. 

Well, here's what I am reading, because I don't need another dog  so don't care if anyone gives me one or not... :rofl: 

1. From the original post - it was about a shelter's philosophy on how to treat/handle and train a dog from an unknown background

2. When sit, stay made her points about what people do in reality, as opposed to what we would like them to do - that really was a huge and important point. I keep saying it, because it was!

For me, in reality, if we are working with an unknown dog, from an unknown background, not knowing how they will react to buttons being pushed in a shelter environment, or the first couple of weeks in a foster home, we are not only being stupid with the dog, we are being stupid with ourselves if we think it's better, smarter or easier to be compulsive (though that whole time I am training the dog in every single interaction, I am showing them that I am here to help them, but they need to listen to me). 

I don't want a face full of teeth for cranking a dog hard for not giving me a nice sit (I have seen this a number of years back - yeeks). I DO want to show a dog that I expect them to behave for me, but I am going to use more of a teaching style that builds on them knowing things, versus a correcting method that corrects them for not knowing. 

Once I have things figured out, I can go to more balanced training - but I TRY to do that whole Volhard type thing - try to motivate and teach, add distractions, proof, etc, and for each level up, I have to wait until they learn to do the corrections. If a dog lunges or does something nutso, that's something different than trying to teach them to take a treat nicely or not yank my arm out.

But basically, treating the adult dog like you would a puppy. That's all it is. And I think that's all she's saying - that before you treat the shelter dog like an adult dog, you train it like a puppy. 

To me, yes, I think that people should take the dog where they are at, and go from there, and not try to start them where I think they should be on May 30 at 3:30. So that may mean going a little more slowly with that baby adult - and think, what would I do if this dog was still a puppy, beyond the extreme examples that people will lay out (what if he attacks me, what if he attacks a kid, what if he attacks a goat) that are not all that common. And in taking them where they are at, we may have to help adopters understand that this dog is not the dog you will have in a year, but if you set them up to succeed, it will be a better dog than you could ever imagine.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Well said.... Perfect.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> Once I have things figured out, I can go to more balanced training - but I TRY to do that whole Volhard type thing - try to motivate and teach, add distractions, proof, etc, and for each level up, I have to wait until they learn to do the corrections. If a dog lunges or does something nutso, that's something different than trying to teach them to take a treat nicely or not yank my arm out.
> 
> But basically, treating the adult dog like you would a puppy. That's all it is. And I think that's all she's saying - that before you treat the shelter dog like an adult dog, you train it like a puppy.


This I can agree with 100%. To me that's still a balance. At some point corrections might/will be needed but, you can accomplish a lot with positive reinforcement. I think the same goes for the different training tools. They all have there place.


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm just grateful that there are people like Msvette around - and if she wishes to train and rehabilitate her dogs in a certain way, it's not unreasonable to ask prospective adopters to keep to the same methods - it's saves any confusion for the dogs.

Surely we'd all prefer to see dogs treated well - and if kinder methods work - great. 
_________
Sue


----------



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

Gharrissc said:


> Maybe I should have been more clear about what I meant in the beginning. *I was talking about tools/methods AFTER the trust has been built.* Obviously it would be a dumbass move to try to set boundaries with a dog who is terrified. No matter what tools you choose to utilize, you have to have trust first. This was really geared more towards dogs that are no longer in the shelter,but maybe pulled from the shelter and fostered in my home. Sometimes on a foster application it is asked what methods you use for training. Even though I have adopted a few dogs from the shelter I mentioned before,and they have seen how much more well behaved they are,they still were uncomfortable with the fact that I do correct my dogs,and I don't go around with treats in my pocket.What bothered them even more is that any foster dog would be used treated the same way. After the bond is built of course.
> 
> I'm not saying treats DON'T EVER have a place in training,but I don't use them that often. Sometimes I use a combo of treats and a collar,but I never use treats solely.


Well I have been posting based on this from the OP many pages ago. 
So I thought we were not talking about some dog who had just been dumped and was still frightened etc.. Of coure you do not use harsh methods with these dogs.
I think when they get to a certain point there may be a place for corrections.
I like your posts Jean. They are well thought out and reasonable.

It is entirely possible that my view of the purpose of rescues is off.

Having said that I simply would not adopt from a rescue that demanded I use a certain type of training to the exclusion of other methods.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Jakes mom,you are right, if her rescue wants to not adopt out because a knowledgable person wants to train a certain way that is not her way, then it is the dogs that lose out.
Just because everyone doesn't do the total "happy happy " positive training way, does not mean any other way is wrong or not kind. All training methods have positive reenforcements involved, whether a pat on the head, a treat, a "good boy", that is all positive. However, neither way is right or wrong, its what works for the dog.
If you have ever trained multiple dogs, then giving praise and happy happy happy all the time to a Lab for instance just makes them sillier and sillier and harder to get calmed down and back to work, these type of dogs need to be made to keep their brains on what they are doing, not goofing around. Yet, a correction to a Chihuahua would not work the same.
You have to do what is best for your dog, your situation, your training abilities.
But to refuse a good home for a dog because another persons ideas or experience don't fit with yours is just plain silly.


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

jakes mom said:


> I'm just grateful that there are people like Msvette around - and if she wishes to train and rehabilitate her dogs in a certain way, it's not unreasonable to ask prospective adopters to keep to the same methods - it's saves any confusion for the dogs.
> 
> Surely we'd all prefer to see dogs treated well - and if kinder methods work - great.
> _________
> Sue


Thank you 

I realize there's a few of you whose noses are quite out of joint. 
I really don't care (again) what you do with your own dogs.
But I've taken in dogs who don't know anything, at all. Never been taught to not jump up so this is just how they behave. 

Like Jean said, you treat them like a new puppy and then go from there. 

Why in the world would you knee a puppy in the chest? 
Sure this is a large dog now, but again, it has never been _taught_ to not jump up. Ever! Often they are chained and this is all they know.

So you tell me "I will knee this dog in the chest". Of course I'm going to say "Are you open to new/different training methods??" If the answer is "YES, I'd love that info", then sure, we'll work with you.
If you say "NO, I've always trained like this and it works!" then we'll probably decline.

Do you want to know some of the answers we get when asked "how would you house train a puppy?" 

Squirt bottles. Rubbing nose in poop/pee. Time out chair. BOP on nose/under chin. Penny cans. Even shock collars, yes. 

What are you _teaching_ the puppy by using any of those things?? 

A leash pop on an older (above 1yr) dog? No problem! A properly fitted prong? Not an issue! Depending on the dog - again, we have soft dogs that this would not be acceptable with! 
And kneeing a dog in the chest for doing what dogs do - unacceptable, IMO!
See, IMO, punishing a dog or puppy for doing what dogs do (chewing on a slipper that was not put up, digging a hole if left alone outside too long and becomes bored, piddling in the house because you forgot to take it out) is unacceptable. IF there's going to be a "no!" given, that's fine - but don't rub their noses, don't squirt them for gosh sake, for piddling on the floor.

You must be open to at least trying other methods of working with a dog to adopt from us. 
Because - while you can do whatever with your own dogs, and I can do whatever with my dogs who were raised from puppies by us and I KNOW they were not exposed to harsh punishments that really have nothing to do with training - then I'm going to do what it takes to protect that dog and if it means declining an otherwise "good" home, then fine, because an owner should never ever take the stance they've "done it all and know it all" and won't change their methods of training. 

I am approaching 1/2 a century mark in a few yrs. AND I have yet to learn and I learn from each and every dog that comes my way. The day I say "I know all there is to know" is a sad day, one in which I'll stop rescuing.


----------



## San (Mar 22, 2012)

Great posts, Jean (and I totally agree with sit, stay's earlier post as well). 

Kudos to all the people who are actively volunteering for rescues. I don't think Msvette should be flamed for doing what she feels is right for the dogs in her rescue. She is already doing A LOT more than the average person in terms of taking care of "unwanted" animals. I know it is definitely a lot more than what I hope to ever accomplish


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN (May 11, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well I have been posting based on this from the OP many pages ago.
> So I thought we were not talking about some dog who had just been dumped and was still frightened etc.. Of coure you do not use harsh methods with these dogs.
> I think when they get to a certain point there may be a place for corrections.
> I like your posts Jean. They are well thought out and reasonable.
> ...


I appreciate that. I do! And I hope that sometimes these rescue posts help in a good way. 

I think the part B or whatever to all of this - if someone has gotten results from a dog using those positive methods, as the foster home, and knows those to be good enough for that dog to be a compliant, safe canine good citizen, then you don't want to turn that dog over to someone who is going to use methods that are unnecessary for that dog. 

Kid example (not comparing dogs to kids, just more fun sometimes!). My mom could stop me in my tracks with a look. Stop, drop, roll, whatever she wanted, that look was enough. So she never came over after I complied and shook me, or smacked me or gave me a poke in the eye, why would she need to, she had already done what she needed to do. Same with dogs - if you have that dog reliable and doing well with positives, makes no sense to add something that's not needed. 

The lady that tried to leash correct my old foster dog - that was not needed. A simple hand signal and a pleasant voice and boom, those old hips would hit he floor. I had adopters quit a class because the trainer wanted them to put a prong on their dog and give him a correction when he looked away while heeling - this was a dog that had lived through incredible cruelty in GA, their owner was imprisoned for it - IN GEORGIA! and they said we don't need to do this because we can get him to do it (more slowly) another way. Now - I had nothing to do with that - they told me after the fact and I really appreciated that they got their dog so well. 

So I think that's why msvette is getting :crazy: because she's saying if I can adopt out a dog doing well, being a good pet, acting like you'd want a dog to act using these methods, why would anyone need to change that? What's that definition of insanity if you do something over and over and get the same result - that must be the corollary (is that the right word?) to it. 

Now, we can all agree that we have spent way too much time talking and need to go do something fun! :hug:


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

Someone said earlier, most the correction tools out there are misused by the general public, and that's just another reason we lean towards positive reinforcement - you simply can't go wrong using it and it's tough to abuse it 

Thank you San. I just love dogs 



> aving said that I simply would not adopt from a rescue that demanded I use a certain type of training to the exclusion of other methods.


And that's fine - for you and folks who believe this way, there's shelters and other rescues without requirements. They just like numbers and dollar signs. 
We are looking for permanent homes for our dogs, I'll say it again. And we get a lot of offended people for different reasons, I do not take it personally if someone objects to our application, or home visit/reference check processes, or even the agreement should they go through with the adoption process and be approved. The type folks who do go through it and are approved are the type who would always use positive reinforcement training so that's always nice


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

I had one applicant come to look at my foster. We always take the dog for a walk to see whether the potential adopter can handle the dog. The dog was on a prong, just in case. He walked ok without pulling on the leash, but was not taught the proper heel position yet. This was a very sweet soft dog that came to us in horrible condition. After three steps the apllicant started yanking the dog with a prong into the proper heel position. The dog was confused and tried to get away from the man. At this point the man hung the dog on the prong and held him up with the front feet off the ground. The dog got incasingly terrified and tried to get away. I grabbed the leash and took the dog away from the man, before things got nasty. When I asked the man what on earth he was thinking, hanging a dog he just met on a prong collar, the response was that a military dog handler taught him this, to get the dog to heel. Well, this is a great way to get his face bitten off. He looked good on paper, good references, etc. And training methods to die for. He felt he was a great home.

Another applicant looked perfect,training experience the whole nine yards. 10 hours after taking the dog home he calls that he is returning the dog because the dog is aggressive. Well, it turns out that this one, on day one, started teaching the dog the out command by hanging him on the prong. And the dog growled at him. I would bite if a stanger walked up to me and started choking me with a prong. They thought they were a great home.


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

I would suggest that those who don't like the way msvette does things in her rescue and are trying to guilt her with dogs that will die at shelters because of her policies, to just take some of those dogs themselves, train them with their methods and find them good homes. Problem of not enough dogs rescued solved


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

RebelGSD said:


> I had one applicant come to look at my foster. We always take the dog for a walk to see whether the potential adopter can handle the dog. *The dog was on a prong,* just in case. He walked ok without pulling on the leash, but was not taught the proper heel position yet. *This was a very sweet soft dog* that came to us in horrible condition. After three steps the apllicant started yanking the dog with a prong into the proper heel position. The dog was confused and tried to get away from the man. At this point the man hung the dog on the prong and held him up with the front feet off the ground. The dog got incasingly terrified and tried to get away. I grabbed the leash and took the dog away from the man, before things got nasty. When I asked the man what on earth he was thinking, hanging a dog he just met on a prong collar, the response was that a military dog handler taught him this, to get the dog to heel. Well, this is a great way to get his face bitten off. He looked good on paper, good references, etc. And training methods to die for. He felt he was a great home.
> 
> Another applicant looked perfect,training experience the whole nine yards. 10 hours after taking the dog home he calls that he is returning the dog because the dog is aggressive. Well, it turns out that this one, on day one, started teaching the dog the out command by hanging him on the prong. And the dog growled at him. I would bite if a stanger walked up to me and started choking me with a prong. They thought they were a great home.


 
Sorry, I don't think this dog should have been on a prong by the potential adopter or you. Why would you put this dog on a prong? What did you think would go through that potential adopter's head when he saw a prong on the dog? Do you think you might have sent out some mixed signals?


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

Because I chose to, because it has worked well for me and hundreds of other rescuers in the past. You can chose to do it differently with your own foster, power to you. I don't expect people to be stupid enough to hang a strange dog on a prong. It did not send the wrong message to hundreds of other people who met the dogs.
No idea what went on in his head, can you please enlighten me?
There is a reason why only one rescue replies. Whatever someone in rescue will say, someone out of the 20 000 members will disagree and jump on them. National board sport number one, bashing and criticizing rescues.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

RebelGSD said:


> Because I chose to, because it has worked well for me and hundreds of other rescuers in the past. You can chose to do it differently with your own foster, power to you. I don't expect people to be stupid enough to hang a strange dog on a prong. It did not send the wrong message to hundreds of other people who met the dogs.
> 
> There is a reason why only one rescue replies. Whatever someone in rescue will say, someone out of the 20 000 members will disagree and jump on them. National board sport number one, bashing and criticizing rescues.


Where do you get I was bashing rescues? 

All I questioned was the use of prong collars on very soft sweet dogs, and I am not anti prongs,especially when in qualified hands and used on dogs as needed, not as a one size fits all.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

No the best way to stop needing homes for rescue dogs is to quit breeding. 

I never tried to guilt anyone about saving dogs. I just said that not every dog will work with every method or person.... Denying a good home to a person who doesn't want to do only positive training is silly.
By saying you can only adopt if you are going to train their way is actually pretty condesending to that person, in other words, if you refuse to train my way, you are not good enough to have one of my dogs. Fine coming from a breeder, after all its their dogs. However, unless this is a privately funded rescue, which maybe msvette's is, is probably illegal if someone got nasty about it.
What I really did not realize is that rescues can afford to discriminate against adopters because they don't train the rescues way.
Wow., just wow.


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

wyominggrandma said:


> No the best way to stop needing homes for rescue dogs is to quit breeding.
> 
> I never tried to guilt anyone about saving dogs. I just said that not every dog will work with every method or person.... Denying a good home to a person who doesn't want to do only positive training is silly.
> By saying you can only adopt if you are going to train their way is actually pretty condesending to that person, in other words, if you refuse to train my way, you are not good enough to have one of my dogs. Fine coming from a breeder, after all its their dogs. However, unless this is a privately funded rescue, which maybe msvette's is, is probably illegal if someone got nasty about it.
> ...


Msvette's rescues is funded out of her own pocket and I think it is pretty silly for a bunch of strangers on an Internet board to guilt her about the ways he choses to train and place the dogs she rescues. It is her dog, until it gets adopted. Why is it fine for a breeder and not fine for an individual rescuer. I think it is pretty condescending to msvette the way the pack is imposing one her.

I chose what I used on my foster based on 15 years of experience with hundreds of rescue dogs and the knowledge of the particular dog I was showing. Also based on observing hundreds of potential adopters handling dogs. Of course, Falkosmom knows better how this dog should have been handled without ever seeing him, and so does any of the 20+ thousand on this board (they will disagree but a rescuer has to find a way to please all at the same time). I admit to being a stupid rescuer who cannot do anything right.

A group here is bashing msvette and her rescue, interesting that those who do the bashing never notice it. This is why most people who do rescue and make their hands dirty disappeared from this board and why the bashers won't hear from them.

Illegal to place her dog with whom she prefers? On which planet?


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

I know that this thread is about rescues not adopting to homes that refuse to use only positive methods for training, including prongs. 

I also know that _you said_ you had a very soft sweet dog. Perhaps I should have dismissed your assessment before making a comment? My mistake for trusting your fifteen years of experience with hundreds of dogs.


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

Falkosmom, you are right, I am totally stupid and and don't deserve to walk on this earth among all of those who know so much better how things should be done. Hopefully one day one of those carrying concealed weapons will release the earth from my presence and make this a better world without me. Thank you for pointing it out, and I agree definitely, please, please don't trust my judgement, it would be a huge mistake form your side.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

So much attitude because somebody does not agree with you. Pitiful.

Msvette2U, my sincerest apologies, now I see exactly where you are coming from and why you do what you do. Please forgive me.


----------



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

RebelGSD said:


> Msvette's rescues is funded out of her own pocket and I think it is pretty silly for a bunch of strangers on an Internet board to guilt her about the ways he choses to train and place the dogs she rescues. It is her dog, until it gets adopted. Why is it fine for a breeder and not fine for an individual rescuer. I think it is pretty condescending to msvette the way the pack is imposing one her.
> 
> I chose what I used on my foster based on 15 years of experience with hundreds of rescue dogs and the knowledge of the particular dog I was showing. Also based on observing hundreds of potential adopters handling dogs. Of course, Falkosmom knows better how this dog should have been handled without ever seeing him, and so does any of the 20+ thousand on this board (they will disagree but a rescuer has to find a way to please all at the same time). I admit to being a stupid rescuer who cannot do anything right.
> 
> ...



No one needs feel guilty about what was said here. I was making a mathamatical observation that the longer dogs stay in rescue fewer dogs will be saved.

It's just a fact. If you average 60 days to adopt a dog out but because of stricter requirements it takes you 90 days then it will be longer until a spot is available. It is not msevette's fault or yours or mine. It is math.

No one is bashing rescues unless you consider questioning certain restrictions is bashing.

We were going to go with a rescue before I purchased my puppy. In my area there unfortunately are 2 kinds of rescue.

The warehouse type which grabs up dogs from shelters and elsewhere and moves them into homes as fast as they can. This type's *main* goal is to save dogs lives not to find a good home for them.

The second type I mentioned before has so many restrictions, plus wanting to dictate to you pretty much for the life of the dog how to feed, what to feed, They even went so far as to tell you the dog had to sleep in your bedroom in an approved crate. They had rules about exercise and so on.

We could have fulfilled their requirements but that is not who we are.
I certainly expect to be vetted by a rescue but when the dog is mine it's mine and I'll decide all those things.

I don't think it is a requirement for some of us to like everything *some* rescues do just because they rescue.

They are no different than breeders, If you don't like the breeders terms then find someone else.

So I am making observations and asking qestions, if that is bashing to you then it's your issue not mine.

To be clear these were rescues in the area tha I live. Not representative of all rescues.


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

Falkosmom said:


> So much attitude because somebody does not agree with you. Pitiful.


Thank you for the compliments


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Are there public rescues? I thought all rescues are privately funded. I did not think the government was running rescue organizations. 

I think a rescue has reasons why they want things a certain way. The dog already has been knocked about from one home to another. Maybe it had poor leadership. Maybe it was abused. Maybe it was neglected. Maybe it was chained and forgotten for a number of years with no socialization and very little human contact. Maybe it had its collar imbedded. 

I can understand the rescue organization having guidelines for fosters and for new homes. Frankly, if they want you to stand on your head and spit nickels for them, and that's the only way you can get the dog, then if you want the dog, you will do what it takes. At least, until the paperwork is filled out and you have the dog. Unfortunately, there are many people who will agree to and say just about anything, and when the ball is in their court, they may or may not come through. 

But the idea of the rescue trying to provide a forever home for the dog, and give them some tools that will be likely to help them succeed or avoid certain problems with the dog, than I am all for that.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

It seems that this discussion is based on positive training and training with corrections, right? Will people on both sides of this discussion define what they believe each training method is and what the benefits are? I'm really interested in knowing what people do for both methods


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

RebelGSD said:


> Msvette's rescues is funded out of her own pocket and I think it is pretty silly for a bunch of strangers on an Internet board to guilt her about the ways he choses to train and place the dogs she rescues. It is her dog, until it gets adopted. .
> 
> Illegal to place her dog with whom she prefers? On which planet?


I suggest you check out the rules for 501(c)(3)'s. Either it is a legit rescue and has proper paperwork which means they have federal as well as local rules to follow or they are not, in which case I don't know why anyone would get a dog from there? Just sayin...


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

shepherdmom said:


> I suggest you check out the rules for 501(c)(3)'s. Either it is a legit rescue and has proper paperwork which means they have federal as well as local rules to follow or they are not, in which case I don't know why anyone would get a dog from there? Just sayin...


A private rescue can be legit, you don't have to 501C to have a rescue. You will have a harder time finding donations, taxes are done differently, and there is no help from the government.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

llombardo said:


> A private rescue can be legit, you don't have to 501C to have a rescue. You will have a harder time finding donations, taxes are done differently, and there is no help from the government.


It might be, but why take the chance? You know that with a 501C not only can you deduct the cost of the dog off of your taxes or any other donation you make, you can be sure your contribution is going toward the cause and the money is not going into the wrong pockets.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Rebelgsd, I did state" unless her rescue was privately funded" which from what you say, it is. Therefore, she has a right to do whatever she wants to put a dog in a home, like breeders can. 
I would also think that if she wants to find them permanent homes, that maybe, just maybe she should not deny a person just because the person doesn't do everything her way.
Like buying a puppy from a breeder who states that you HAVE to feed raw, you HAVE to stay home 24/7 with the puppy, you HAVE to do everything my way. Will this breeder find home for puppie? Most likely yes, but in the mean time has turned down good homes because they can't stay with the puppy 24/7, they have to work, or can't feed raw because of availability of raw food. You get my point.
Sometimes , everyone has to bend a bit. Like Selzer says, people can jump through every hoop you ask, but once the dog is living with them, they will do as they want.. It just seems it would be easier to not be quite so "unbending" in order to place the dogs in good homes. 
I guess this thread is not an easy one. I think rescue folks are great and giving, they spend time and money to help dogs get out of situations of all kinds and into situations that will give them a happy home. I have rescued and fostered dogs/cats and horses. I always thought that the person adopting an animal from me had to have everything I thought was best" fenced yards, this kind of fence for the horses, etc etc. However, I learned that sometimes bending the rules placed the animal in a home that turned out to be a perfect fit. I did learn to bend and it was for the animals benefit, not because I wanted everything my way.
You learn alot in over half a century of living/training/breeding/showing/rescuing animals, at least I have. I have things I prefer to do my way, but have also learned that in the case of loving homes, whether from breeding or fostering/rescueing, are hard to come by and rules/demands sometimes can be bent to benefit everyone concerned.


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

OK let me weigh in here on 501 c 3 requirements -- 

The "Rules" for a 501 c 3 (NFP) largely are that they have by-laws and a constitution AND FOLLOW THOSE BY-LAWS and THAT CONSTITUTION. There are also certain regulations about what constitutes a board I think (The federal rules went through a big change within the last 10 to 12 years & got specific about some things.) So you can have in your by-laws of a rescue organization that you will only adopt to people that train a certain way. (You can not have require them to violate animal abuse laws or any other law.) You can change your constitution & by-laws by following certain procedures and by filing the revisions with the appropriate body.

You DO NOT HAVE TO SPECIFY in your bylaws or constitution exactly what your adoption requirements are. You can say that you will have them & they will be followed which would allow you to amend them more easily than spelling them out to the letter in your public filings.

The "rules" you have to follow are largely transparency issues regarding governance and finances (including expenditures in synch with mission)The federal government and state governments will not prohibit you from imposing restrictions on adopters so long as those behaviors do not violate the law. 

Clearer?

If a rescue has a contract with an adopter, that contract - so long as it is within reason - is likely enforcable. (not an attorney here).


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

shepherdmom said:


> I suggest you check out the rules for 501(c)(3)'s. Either it is a legit rescue and has proper paperwork which means they have federal as well as local rules to follow or they are not, in which case I don't know why anyone would get a dog from there? Just sayin...


You better check it out yourself. The federal government and local government do not prescribe 501c3 charities that they are required to adopt out dogs into crank and yank homes.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Wow, crank and yank????? As opposed to what exactly?


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

wyominggrandma said:


> Wow, crank and yank????? As opposed to what exactly?


Maybe very soft dogs on prongs?


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

Or dogs whose owners cannot get them to bond withe them?


----------



## LifeofRiley (Oct 20, 2011)

I hope that those of you who are criticizing msvette and RebelGSD have had first hand experience working in a rescue. Otherwise, your comments are uncalled for and really quite naive. As someone who has fostered and worked with rescues, I can tell you that I quickly understood why certain rules were in place. And, it is not an understatement to say that dealing with “Joe Public Dog Owner” at adoption events or one-on-one meetings is eye-opening.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

llombardo said:


> ....As far as closing a door in a dogs face so it doesn't door dash....well you can just as easily put the dog in a sit, tell it to wait, treat them for doing so, open door, tell them to stay, give a treat and repeat. *IMO that is definitely going to get a better response from the dog*....


Buahahaaa right! What about a dog that doesn't care about treats and charges -- and I do mean _charges_ -- the door ? The closing the door method works. I do not mean slam it in the dog's head or any such thing. It was recommended to me when Tucker came here and charged out of his crate, charged the interior (mud room area) door AND the outer door. Full force, 70 lb dog CHARGE ahead. What finally worked was opening the door a touch, if he moved, close it. Repeat 150,000 times. He didn't know sit yet. Once he knew sit, we could work with that instead of the door closing... heck, I still close the door on him if he breaks the sit, though. 



msvette2u said:


> Ask Chelle about collars - her dog had one ingrown/embedded and now cannot use a prong or any such thing.
> Gotta know something alternative to that.....


True enough. It was not embedded or infected, but it was pretty nasty. It has taken time, but he is now fine with me stroking his neck and putting his collar on or off (non-prong). (He was quite sensitive to any neck touching for quite some time.) He doesn't wear a prong anymore. Anything "neck" will not work with this dog. Probably will always be that way. He is doing very well with his Easy Walk.



llombardo said:


> I *don't think it should be told no at all when it jumps, I think it should be ignored for bad behavior. Once the paws are on the ground then the praise and reward...*Dogs are looking for any kind of attention they can get, whether its good or bad. By telling a dog NO, then rewarding it when it is on all fours would defeat the purpose and nothing would be learned except that when that dog jumps it knows that some kind of attention will be given, very confusing for the dog. I find that I definitely get further with the dog when things are done in a positive manner. *Correcting the dog is not going to speed up the process* and sometimes it does more damage then good...I am speaking about dogs that are in shelters or in rescue groups without a known history.


 


Jax08 said:


> Then they are doing it incorrectly. The idea is to block them without touching them as touching them IS a reward in itself. Hand in the air, knee up to block them away from your body. *Anyone purposely nailing their dogs with their knee is only teaching them that pain comes from wanting to be near them*....


Ok, I'd like to bring back in this jumping up subject. 

Myself and a trainer I hired to come here both tried the "turn around" thing with Tucker for the jumping up. This was a wonderful game to him and he would then simply jump up even harder on our backs. If you're average female sized, this meant his front paws on your shoulders and his head trying to reach around to get to your face. He would NOT give up. 70 lbs of dog repeatedly jumping at your back.

A girlfriend of mine who is pretty dog oriented tried the turn around routine, too. She was literally assaulted. Scratched up. He tore up her shirt. She was patient. She didn't say a word, didn't panic, didn't move fast. She just kept turning away and ignoring him. She was beat up more and more for her efforts. She is not afraid of dogs, but had to step away from him, he was going at her so hard.

We tried the old "step on the leash and let him try to jump" routine. Yeah. That amped him up like crazy. He would alligator roll all over the place. Add that to his neck sensitivities and it quickly became a nightmare.

We tried the avoidance thing with the knee -- not making contact -- just blocking. Nope. Didn't work. That was fun to him. 

So finally I knocked him pretty dang hard, knee to chest. I believe it took exactly two, maybe three times. I've never done it since. I don't need to anymore. He's never -- let me repeat never -- jumped on me again. Even better, he doesn't jump on anyone. He turns sideways to get a side-rub. He is always rewarded for doing this with nice words, baby talk and rubs. 

I'm no dog trainer but positive only, in this instance, didn't work. I wasn't going to give it weeks worth of time while he was literally abusing us.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

RebelGSD said:


> Or dogs whose owners cannot get them to bond withe them?


If you are speaking about the 2 GSDs that failed to bond to me because of my oversocializing them and their faulty genetics, I assume you are suggesting I should have put prongs on them? Why yes, now that I think of it, they were both overly soft dogs. I guess you are right, harsh corrections on them would have worked miracles.


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

Jack's Dad said:


> No one is bashing rescues unless you consider questioning certain restrictions is bashing.
> 
> We were going to go with a rescue before I purchased my puppy. In my area there unfortunately are 2 kinds of rescue.
> 
> ...


 
With the rescue who are so restrictive,I am sure a lot of the adopters say that they will comply with all of those rule,but in reality most of them don't. I can understand wanting the *BEST* home for any animal,but you can't always put your wants off on an adopter. Of course their are things that you can't and shouldn't bend on,but you also have to realize that just because someone doesn't feed raw or won't allow their dogs on the furniture, that they are not a bad home. I feed my dogs an organic diet, and *WOULD LIKE* for their new family to feed them the same way. However I won't turn down a good home that may not feed organic,but may feed a high quality diet. Even though most people try to provide the very best for their animals, I feel that even the best homes can improve on something. Nothing is always *PERFECT. *I compare raising animals to raising kids.While their are basic needs that must be met, there is always wiggle room to implement your beliefs...As long as overall well being isn't being compromised. 

I've had to realize this too with other people's pets. I have neighbors who are great people,but they never walk their dogs and wonder why they are hyper. I used to always try to educate people or even offer to walk their dogs for them,just to get them out of the yard. I have had to learn though that if the animal is otherwise taken care of, that I really shouldn't try to pass my belief of all dogs should be walked and kept inside on other people.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

You can over socialize a dog to the point that they won't bond with you? How interesting.


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

I would not know about that, I never had a problem with dog with substandard or above standard temperaments bonding with me, both rescues and my own. Interesing the dogs not bonding with such an expert owner. I guess the prong on the soft dog worked even in the hands of someone as stupid as me


----------



## RebelGSD (Mar 20, 2008)

Jax08 said:


> You can over socialize a dog to the point that they won't bond with you? How interesting.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

I am curious... what does crank and yank have to do with bonding with your dog? 
Obedience/training doesn't make your dog bond with you, everyday living, feeding, affection does the bonding, training establishes guidelines and rules for the dog.
If I touch my dog to make him sit, by pushing down his butt, is that an old way to do it? The cruel way? If I play " here is the cookie, sit sit sit until the dog sits, or just stand there and watch and wait until the puppy does something , makes a move, anything towards the eventual sit, is that the positive method? I watched a trainer do this with a puppy, she sat and stared at the puppy , just stared at the puppy until it made a move with its hind feet. Got a cookie........... stared again, moved, got a cookie. Puppy never sat, but she did get lots of cookies and good girls for moving her feet. POsitive, yes. Did the puppy learn anything other than moving her feet gave her cookies? nope.
Okay, so I am sitting in my house or at the vets and as soon as the dog sits, I say sit and give a treat. Do this over and over... Sit and a treat. Positive training, yes.. Dog learns to sit and gets a treat. 
I am working with and adult dog that refuses to play the cookie, move, sit game. I reach over and push butt down while saying sit. Good dog, cookie. repeat until dog is sitting when I saw sit. Might have to push butt down a few times. Dog gets idea..
Force training? To some, yes this would be force training. After all, I touched the dog.
Adult dog jumps up on people. You say, "no, sit, off, no, walk into dog, whatever the "positive " training entails. Dog still wants to jump on people. Or you can put up your knee into a bent position. Dog jumps, knee is in his way. He gets off, sits or stands, but doesn't jump because he ran into the knee in his way. Oh, this is cruel, this is horrible. The person didn't do anything, the dog moved into an inmovable object and got down. Told good dog... Next time dog starts to jump up, he has learned that the same object might be in his way. Doesn't jump. Not cruel, not inhumane, just another way to teach. I can put my knee up, or pick my foot up in front of my dog and she will back out of the way.I can pick up my foot and say back and she will back away. I never touched her with the knee or foot, but when my foot is up off the ground, she knows to back up. She was not abused or trained cruelly, but trained by my methods. Would this work on all dogs? Probably not. Have I ever hit my dog, beat my dog, yanked my dog off her feet while training to heel? Nope, but because she learned that if she walked ahead of me, the leash/collar went tight, if she moved back, it was loose. I never jerked her. I have jerked on a dog at a training class. He was a huge lab, had no manners , was trying to eat other dogs. Should I have just stood there, giving treats, being positive with him while he tried to do damage to other dogs? No, I gave him a swift "jerk" he looked up at me and went " oh, she means business" and went on to become a super dog.
Why does there have to be a my way and your way? Why can't people be allowed to train a dog the way they are comfortable with. I do clicker training with my dog also, she will practically stand on her head to get a click and a treat. Positive, you bet. But, because I have a bad shoulder and can't deal with pulling on a leash, if a dog gets to pulling and out of control, you can't tell me I am cruel because I give a quick jerk/release to get their attention?


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

Jax08 said:


> You can over socialize a dog to the point that they won't bond with you? How interesting.


Never saw anything like it. They were brother and sister, which is why I state there was also a genetic factor. They by no means had anything that even remotely resembled GSD temperaments. It was really pathetic and sad. I let anyone and everyone play with them and pet them. When we saw people I could make them sit stay to stay with me, but it was obvious both these dogs would have rather been with the stranger passing by and only reluctantly obeyed. There definitely was something wrong with these dogs.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

Shame when a person has to put a prong on a dog to force it to bond to them. What if the dog fails to bond with the prong, hog tie it?

And I never said I was an expert, so please keep your sarcasm to your self. I only stated that you don't use hard corrections on soft dogs.

I am entitled to train how I see fit and have my own opinions.

Any rescue that presents a soft dog to a potential adopter on a prong sends out a red flag to a potential adopter to run. Why is the soft dog on a prong? And what damage has been done to this soft dog recieving hard corrections? How could one not question the methods of that rescue?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Falkosmom - you are completely twisting what Rebel said...completely. Why exactly are you being so nasty? And you did start with her...not the other way. IN fact, this whole thread is one ugly remark after another and really just needs to be closed.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I don't think anyone here doesn't love their dogs or animals in general. Everyone is entitled to do what they want with their own pets as long as it benefits the pet and doesn't hurt them. Rescues are wonderful whether they are non profit or private. We need more of them out there!! Speaking of rescues, look what we rescued today on a bridge after someone threw them out of the car in the middle of traffic...they both ended up injured, but the animal shelter is willing to work with them because they have wonderful temperaments. The owner of these dogs may rot in h#ll


http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/images/attach/jpg.gif


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

So finally I knocked him pretty dang hard, knee to chest. I believe it took exactly two, maybe three times. I've never done it since. I don't need to anymore. He's never -- let me repeat never -- jumped on me again. Even better, he doesn't jump on anyone. He turns sideways to get a side-rub. He is always rewarded for doing this with nice words, baby talk and rubs. 

I'm no dog trainer but positive only, in this instance, didn't work. I wasn't going to give it weeks worth of time while he was literally abusing us. 
__________________
 chelle, this is what I meant, sometimes being all positive and stuff just doesn't work on some dogs. That certainly does not mean you are cruel, you did what you had to do to make life easier for you and dog.
 I have done rescue/fostering. I have also had to work with dogs that come into the vet that have no manners, don't know a single thing, are out of control and all over the place. I guess, according to some, I should spend the time to make this dog calm down and behave, not try to bite, lay still,sit or whatever we need to do,even simply walking the dog to the kennels by repeating over and over, and give treats to show positive teaching methods. Sorry, but don't have time. If I have to put the collar up high behind the ears, and a sharp" pay attention" jerk, for my safety, then I am going to do it. If that makes me cruel, then I guess I am. That doesn't mean I beat the dog up, hang it by its collar or kick it, it means I take control. 
I don't have time to obedience train someones dog that comes to the vet to have a procedure done or board for the day or get a bath, I have to deal with what comes in the door. 
Old time methods are not cruel is done correctly. Some would say using an ecollar is unhumane, but it is done all the time. Positive training is great, but not always advisable in every situation.


----------



## Falkosmom (Jul 27, 2011)

Jax08 said:


> Falkosmom - you are completely twisting what Rebel said...completely. Why exactly are you being so nasty? And you did start with her...not the other way. IN fact, this whole thread is one ugly remark after another and really just needs to be closed.


Uh... please reread, RebelGSD keeps sniping at me, not the other way around because I disagreed with harsh corrections on a very soft dog.

Why are you not asking her why she is being so nasty to me?


----------



## Gharrissc (May 19, 2012)

llombardo;2495144Speaking of rescues said:


> http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/images/attach/jpg.gif[/URL]


 
That person who threw those two dogs out will probably go somewhere else and get a new dog. I'm glad they are safe,sound,and will be given a chance.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I did read what was written. You got sarcastic and nasty with her first. And then I reported the thread and hope it's closed. This isn't worth my time.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

I am also curious why a prong collar is equated by some as cruel? If used correctly, they are good. If used correctly, you do not have to put any pressure at all on a dog while training. I have seen/trained with police dogs that have only known a prong collar. They are beautifully trained, happy dogs.

I have never used an electronic collar for training. Yet I see it used on hunting dogs alot. Does this collar become a torture item as well?

I am really curious when a prong collar turned into a horrible item of pain for a dog instead of a useful training tool. 
I am not being sarcastic or anything, just curious why there is so much hate for this particular collar by some.


----------



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

I am really against closing threads unless someone is waaaayyyy out of line.

If people want to go at it all night long so what.

Anyone who does not want to participate is free to do something else.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

wyominggrandma said:


> I am also curious why a prong collar is equated by some as cruel? If used correctly, they are good. If used correctly, you do not have to put any pressure at all on a dog while training. I have seen/trained with police dogs that have only known a prong collar. They are beautifully trained, happy dogs.
> 
> I have never used an electronic collar for training. Yet I see it used on hunting dogs alot. Does this collar become a torture item as well?
> 
> ...


I don't like prongs myself, my dog had it on once and I got yelled at because it wasn't tight enough(I did that on purpose) She was trained on a flat and doesn't need a prong, so why is a requirement? How often do you see any other dogs besides GSD's, Dobermans, Rotts, Boxers, some labs/retrievers with a prong? Years ago people got prongs for the bigger, "meaner" dogs because they thought it looked cool. I will never forget how sad some of those dogs looked wearing that collar...I am sure it wasn't used the right way, but that is what I have stuck in my brain. I also would never use the e collar. I can very well put the prong on my dog and give her a pop if she pulls or shock her, but in that situation I feel I would just have to work that much harder to train her. I don't want a robot dog that responds out of fear..I want my dog to respect me as I respect her If I have a problem with a dog pulling I will use the easy walk harness, it works very well and really is the same concept as the prong, but there is no way anyone can use it the wrong way


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Gharrissc said:


> That person who threw those two dogs out will probably go somewhere else and get a new dog. I'm glad they are safe,sound,and will be given a chance.



We are so overloaded with pit bulls in every shelter that it makes me sad that these guys could end up being in a bad situation. I'm leaving messages with some rescues to see if they have room to pull them out of the shelter.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Jan 2, 2011)

Thanks, was just asking. I have used prongs, never used an ecollar.
I have been shocked to see prongs on small dogs lately. 
I usually use a martingale collar on my dogs when walking them, never have any issues. 
Have wondered about the different harnesses you see so many. Of course, you can buy the ones "as seen on tv" and they are trained instantly.. lol


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

wyominggrandma said:


> Thanks, was just asking. I have used prongs, never used an ecollar.
> I have been shocked to see prongs on small dogs lately.
> I usually use a martingale collar on my dogs when walking them, never have any issues.
> Have wondered about the different harnesses you see so many. Of course, you can buy the ones "as seen on tv" and they are trained instantly.. lol


I tried the gentle leader with my golden but it annoyed him so much that he couldn't concentrate. Then I switched to the easy walk harness and its like walking an angel My friend is using the e collar on her boxer that is completely out of control, but I blame her because she doesn't follow through or work on training the dog--she knows that I'm against the collar. My dog and her dog are one day apart and the difference in them is amazing as far as the training goes.


----------



## jakes mom (Feb 29, 2012)

wyominggrandma said:


> I am also curious why a prong collar is equated by some as cruel? If used correctly, they are good. If used correctly, you do not have to put any pressure at all on a dog while training. I have seen/trained with police dogs that have only known a prong collar. They are beautifully trained, happy dogs.
> 
> I have never used an electronic collar for training. Yet I see it used on hunting dogs alot. Does this collar become a torture item as well?
> 
> ...


I'm against prongs and choke chains, even though I correctly used chokers for 20 years or more with no problems. 

The last dog I took on was severely reactive to dogs, and would ignore even severe corrections and he would be literally choking himself and frothing at the mouth. I don't deny it bloody scared me, I thought he might kill or severely injure himself, and injure me in the process - I just couldn't hold onto him. A harness and a halter were much better. 

Members of this forum know how to use these tools - so many members of the public don't, and used incorrectly they can cause harm. 

Shock collars IMO are brutal, especially due the fact that the level of correction is so high that no-one on this site ever goes anywhere near the full power - so why are they so powerful - can you imagine the poor dogs on the receiving end - it's torture. 

By promoting these tools we are saying they ok. In the wrong hands they are far from ok. IMO Shock collars even the right hands have so much potential for psychological harm. 
_________
Sue


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

This can always be a heated topic, but some members have crossed well past the line of appropriate behavior. There isn't enough actual discussion going on to make this thread worth saving, so I'm closing it.

-Admin


----------

