itsadogslife

No. But I would not hesitate to give an 'out' correction.

That's fine. Thank you for providing the quote in context. I don't train guard dogs so I do not know the rationale behind it. I feel sure that if Koehler was alive today he would simply put a bark collar on the dog - but that probably isn't to many people's liking either. I also know that many thousands of dogs in this country are abandoned and put to sleep for far less reasons than simply barking. So if you can stop the barking using other methods that fine.

Sure. So can you name me a modern method that guarantees off-leash reliability (around distractions) for any breed and temperament in 10 weeks? Can you name me a method that will take your dog as a complete novice and trained him to pass a novice obedience exam in ten weeks, regardless of how experienced the handler is or isn't? Can you name me a method that has a demonstrated success rate of doing this with over 80% of clients in a class setting over a an extended period of time? Let's say ten years of demonstrated success? Let me say it again, I am perfectly fine with you choosing any method of training you wish. A person must first and foremost be comfortable and confident in the method they choose. The Koehler method is not for everyone and that's fine. But when you say there are better methods, the above is my own personal criteria for better. It may not be yours (and again, that's fine) but that's what i am looking for when someone says better.

Seeing as this is a direct quote, you should have no trouble then providing the book, the page number and the year of edition in which this appeared. You might also like to expand the quote so that we can see where Koehler is referring to a 'young puppy making noise after he has had 5 or 6 days to adjust'.

It is a method that was developed and tested over 16 years and 11,000 handlers and their dogs. It was proven to work with all dogs regardless of breed or temperament. That's fine, I am not suggesting that you or anyone else do anything other than what works for you. And yet, on day 7 Koehler will test the attentiveness of the dog by finding a big distraction for the dog (such as a rabbit), he will walk the dog up to the rabbit to make sure the dog has seen it, and if the dog remains attentive and follows the handler when he turns, you then move onto the next section of the course (namely, teaching the heel). Will your method bring the same compliance under distraction in seven days? There is a big difference between a technique or even a random collection of techniques and a 'method'. Why do you call your method correction based? Just because a method uses correction doesn't mean it is based on corrections? Surely not? Any method, including Koehler, that hopes to teach a dog to do something is based on reinforcement. Correction alone, cannot teach a dog to do anything. At best it can stop a behaviour, but it cannot teach a new behavior.

True.

No, it isn't.

That's because the behaviour being trained is self-rewarding. Dogs chase cats because the behavior is self-reinforcing - they seldom catch the cat, meaning they seldom achieve the external reward, yet they persist in the behaviour because the behaviour is self rewarding. I might add that the behavior being reinforced (in other words, rewarded) is quite obvious should you watch the process.

A few of things: 1: The first week of foundation on the line long does not teach heel. 2: There are no leash corrections in the first week. 3: The first three days of the first week require the handler to put a 15’ line on the dog and walk from point A to point B without stopping and without paying any attention to the dog, you then take a short break and walk from B to C, take a break and then walk from C to D and so forth. If the dog forges ahead, even if it pulls you the whole way, you do not do anything other than keep walking until you reach your designated point B. If it lags you ignore it and keep walking. Basically you ignore the dog completely. You do this for 20mins twice a day for three days. There are no about turns in the first three days. On the fourth day, if the dog forges you DO NOT GIVE A LEASH CORRECTION, you simply turn around and go the other way. You may think this is just semantics but it is not. After three days of work on the 15’ line the dog knows full well how long the line is. The only reason the dog gets caught on the leash is because he has failed to pay attention to the handler. If a dog was tied to a tree and then ran out to the end of the line and got caught would you say the tree had corrected him? The only important thing that is going on here is from the dog’s point of view, not yours or the handler. The dog no more blames the human than he would if he was tied to a tree. Koehler allows the dog to experience the consequences of his own actions through experience. The same way that all living animals learn, through experience. The long line works as reinforcement. And no, the dog is not reinforced by being caught out by the line. Rather the behaviour that is being taught here (which is specifically not heeling) is reinforced every time the dog avoids being caught by the line. And more importantly the behaviour is self-reinforcing – that is why Koehler specifically instructs the handler not to speak or even look at the dog during the first week. For if the behaviour is to become self-reinforcing the dog must work it out himself. Which if you have trained your dog using this method, you know happens very quickly. What is being taught here is not reinforcement, but rather self-reinforcement. Something which in my humble opinion is far more motivating to a dog than anything we have to give him, whether it be praise, treats or toys. The first week of training is called the Foundation – there is a reason for that. I do not mean to give offense here, but the only way to truly understand the method is to train a dog using it. Anyone who has used the method (as written in the book) knows full well that the reward/ correction ratio is, as I said, about 100 to 1 in favour of reward.

[quote name='Kavik' I stated in an above post that I have no problem with methods that use corrections as well as rewards, but Koehler is pretty heavy handed in his use of corrections, including in teaching new exercises. It always makes me wonder why people say that. For sure in the problem section, his methods for fixing problem behaviours are extreme. But he recommends that one should take the dog through the 13 week course before any of those issues are addressed. Koehler knows full well that most of the problems people encounter will have resolved themselves long before they ever get to that section. And of course, he only recommends such drastic action if the choice is either put the dog down or fix the problem. On the other hand, I find Koehler to be extremely fair in his teaching methods, insisting that the dog be taught each new command though many repetitions before any correction is given. If followed correctly, the ratio of reward/correction is about 100 to 1 in favour of reward for every exercise taught.

Kavik, why do you say correction "based" method? What reason do you have saying that its "basis" is correction? Surely you would not say that any method that simply uses correction is therefore based on corrections?

The Koehler Method will certainly provide you with that. I am however, a little concerned with this statement. So long as your puppy is well raised and does not come to training with any serious behavioral issues, there is no 'occasional hidings' in Koehler. Follow the method exactly as written, and you will find no reason to give your dog a 'hiding'.

If you are going to use the Koehler Method, the chances are you will have to do it alone as I doubt there are many, if any, trainers left still using the method in Australia. It can be done, so long as you follow the book exactly as instructed. If you decide to go it alone, you should get in contact with Tony Ancheta and get hold of his Companion Dog Planners. Tony has over 30+ years of experience in using the Method and trained with both Bill and Dick Koehler. Tony will also give you whatever help you need via email. Otherwise from what you said regarding your previous dog, there are other trainers in Sydney that could have helped you with your previous dog. I would recommend looking up Steve Courtney at K9 Pro (he has a website). He has dealt with aggression problems and is an excellent trainer. His methods aren't Koehler, but he uses corrections where appropriate. Check him out.

go here - http://www.koehlerdogtraining.com/ and email Tony Ancheta, if anyone knows of a trainer in Sydney, Tony might. You'll be very lucky though to find one.

That's what I would do. Also I would try and put it on command, so I'll say "do your business (name of dog)" and then praise when he starts peeing.