Erny

Or a Gentle Leader? Gentle? Certainly not names descriptive of what they do. Good point, Staranais.

Have I missed something? Why hand feed? I don't find it easy reading your 'shorthand' (sms) style of writing. Capitals at the beginning of sentences and the proper typing out of words I find is easier to follow.

My previous girl, also a Ridgeback (so a short, fine, single coat) was shaved when she had to have ultrasounds, so I'd suggest yes.

Thanks, Huski. But was it the "Pro-K9 Hot Tips" (I want to change the name of that) Facebook page, or my other one? I have a feeling I didn't hit the "publish" button for the "Hot Tips" page. Gotta go check that.

I was having a laugh about that the other day with a friend, it's gone from a choke or strangle collar, to a check chain to a correction collar, when people start feeling bad about this name I'd like to know what they'll change it to next Not intended to make the OP feel bad, at the end of the day the device is still the same, you'll either feel bad about it or not, changing the name wont change your feelings When I used to visit a different forum, which was predominantly populated by "positive only" (so to speak) sectors, I found that the people there began to get nasty, snipey and/or sarcastic towards people when they'd actually run out of good reasonable argument to support their views. Even though these tools are labled "Choker Chains" I call them "Check Chains" or "Correction Chains" as well. And I prefer others to consider them as such also. The reason being is that the problem with the term "Choker Chain" is that consciously or even sub-consciously, it has people thinking that the tool works on the premise of choking. This doesn't lend itself to (especially novice) people remembering that they actually need to develop lead handling techniques to work it properly. I have said on more than one occasion when working with my clients, when they have referenced the chain as a "choker" ..... "Please don't think of the chain as a Choker - think of it as a check chain, then the sub-conscious of your brain is more likely to help you to remember how it is meant to be applied." I have found labelling in these circumstances does make a beneficial difference to the handler and as a consequence, to the dog. The other good reason for a change of name is because if a tool has a bad sounding name, before you've even had a chance to explain, discuss and show the benefits it can have, people's minds have already shut down and their ears have closed against them. It doesn't help that there are orgs who also decry just a certain aversive style of tool/s that in fact do have beneficial effects and are sometimes for some dogs in their better interest, welfare speaking to use in training.

I taught my friend to teach this to her two dogs. It was when I was dogless and I wanted to use my friend's dogs as demo dogs for one of the Casey Microchipping Day events. It worked really well and wasn't too difficult to teach, although I had to use a couple of small blocks of wood to 'knock' together, because we were demo'ing outdoors. Unfortunately her dogs came down with Canine Cough a day before the event, so we weren't able to demo at all. I have the steps of the trick written out on Pro-K9's "Hot Tips" Facebook page, which is linked through my website, if anyone wants to see it. Just don't mind the order of things I've written there so far. Facebook confuses me a little and I've realised in hind-sight I haven't set things out as best as they could be. Also, more tips etc. to be added. ..... sorry, I've forgotten myself and just realised the thread I was in. This is very off topic and I'll delete it if you think I should. Pardon me.

Could it have been that the lady thought the lead was attached? On the odd occasion, a lead snap hook can accidentally come away. I've had it happen to me, although it wasn't long before I realised this was the case. Reading your OP, I get an image in my head that might suggest the lady wasn't aware and felt silly for this fact alone. Maybe???

Was mostly just driving by with another idea people might want to try. With the strong ones that's where I find twisting can shift their centre of gravity and put them off balance enough to break the hold. On reflection you would need to understand using ground force to make it work effectively to shift their weight or you could go a over t. I agree that some of the big humpy dogs are like wombats in terms of being solid compact little pile drivers. This is going off topic but seeing as you were driving by and stopped in ..... we all know there's different methods that can be applied. One I have is to walk into the dog's space. It's really hard for them to hump when they have to walk backwards on their back legs and they tend to lose balance enough to have to get down. And it also means you are reclaiming the space they took, rather than delivering up that space to them and you can do this without giving them any attention whatsoever. Mind you, I can remember one (smallish but strong) dog who, when I did this, just decided to clutch on with his back legs as well. It was hard not to laugh. Obviously a different tactic was needed for him .

Or just grazing, so not really filling his belly. My boy's naturopath told me something I haven't checked further into but found interesting. She said that dogs are designed to gourge (as we know) and there's something about a full belly that triggers enzymes to get to work to digest. In a normal/healthy dog, I believe that feeding whole raw food will not result in farts smelling really bad. My boy has digestive issues. His farts can really smell foul, even though he is on whole raw food. But then, his digestive issues are part of what we are sorting through and trying to remedy. That's another story in itself. Actually, come to think of it ..... I haven't smelt a really foul fart from him for the past couple of days and we did have a break from them for about 5 days approximately two weeks ago. That's a good sign . But, back on topic. I'm not a fan of free feeding for more than one reason. Try feeding your dog a whole raw diet (switch over gradually, if he's not used to it) and start feeding him meals rather than free feeding. Give him his meal and allow 20 minutes to finish it. If he's left it in that time and hasn't returned, lift the meal. His next meal will be in the evening (if you're feeding 2 x daily) or the next day (if you're feeding 1 x daily). This said on the assumption that your dog has no other health issues and is of a reasonable weight.

Thank you, although it doesn't guarantee me I'll be able to 'talk' with you. I hit buttons that often have me zooming somewhere else (some other page/s). But no matter - we'll see how I go at the time . Thanks - but I have another page. I'll find it - there's stuff I need to do, obviously, for people to be able to go there. I'm trying to build it so that there are training/care tips on it and that people can find it from my website and vice versa. The world of facebook and how it works eludes me . Sorry for again. Won't do it anymore. Here, at least .

Jeanne - we're NOT slamming positive trainers. If anything is being critiqued here it is the course which very obviously prescribes against the use of P+ no matter what. Such a course creates a bias in people who do it (unless they have an inkling otherwise). Those same people are often the ones who sprout words such as "abuse", "cruelty", "rip the dog's head off" and so forth, casting not only a dim light on trainers who are balanced and who use corrections judiciously but appropriately and well, but also making the owners of dogs feel so guilty about even thinking to do so. And in the end, it's the dog that will pay. Be that because the owner, who is unable to fix the problematic behaviour of their dog through the long haul of counter-conditioning; food; and all those other things we ALL do and try, thinks there is no other way, or because the dog is so problematic within the community that someone 'else' comes along and seizes the dog for its ill behaviour. This doesn't happen for all dogs of course. Some owners will battle on regardless because they love their dogs so much, just as we love our own. But for those who are trying the "positive" ways and think that's all they should do even though it isn't working, harmony in the relationship between dog and owner does not reign. And then there are those dogs who respond well to the Delta type prescription methodology. And I say it that way because Delta is a course that DOES prescribe. To the contrary, NDTF teaches all and aims to not bias people's thoughts, but to let them hear, see and experience, and to make up their own minds. I instruct on the NDTF course. In fact, the topic that I now instruct on is Head-collars. And I work hard during those seminars to not reveal my own preferences or dislikes one way or the other. If I can come away from a workshop with the students not knowing what I think of the training tool, then I'm pleased. I show the good, the bad and the ugly. And I'll do that of any of the training tools and/or methodology that I'm teaching on. In my mind, there is no one right way nor is there any one wrong way (and this goes to training tools as well). For the simple reason that regardless of my own dogs and what works best for them; regardless of what experiences I've had in the past with working with other dogs and people, there is ALWAYS going to be another dog that is different from the one before and the one before that and before that. It is the narrowness of the Delta course by comparison to the more broad NDTF teachings that is being compared here. NOT individual trainers. A few comments made their way through during the meanderings of this thread, certainly. But that's been pretty levelled up and I think everyone is in agreeance that (as I have said before) "there are trainers and there are trainers, no matter which camp they originate from". This is about the courses, and what and how much they teach and whether that is putting trainers on the ground who have broad knowledge and at least some experience in all quadrants of training to be able to deal with dogs no matter the issue and the circumstance. It is also (IMO) about not teaching a bias before they've even put those trainers on the ground.

There'll possibly be a second one soon [for a different cause]. When I have details I'll post them on our Facebook page What? I have to try to find myself around Facebook? I always get lost . I created another facebook page to link with my website. But now I can't even find THAT !! How would I know when you've posted to your Facebook page? Sorry for the .

Based on that statement Jeanne, I think its very clear that you don't get it at all. The major difference between the Delta square and the NDTF square is that the Delta square is smaller but with much higher walls. That's it in a nutshell, PF. Well said, as usual.

Hi RVN - you HAVE been very busy and I'm pleased to hear this research is continuing. Stupid question this is going to be, but I need to know I've asked it so I'll put it out there. If a dog has a crushed vertebrae in its neck, can your work help her? I ask on behalf of someone I know so it is not my dog and although she's told me about it, I get a bit vague on the full details. I do know that anti-inflammatories are used to help and so I wondered if what you are doing is likely to provide wondrous results (don't we all wish for those?). I believe some sort of intravenous stem cell treatment is being conducted on her now, involving a treatment once a month. It's apparently fairly new (at least to the attending Vet) so we're waiting for time to tell us the likely success (or not) from this treatment. Not to suggest we're expecting a cure. But it would be nice if the treatment could reduce the pain that has a tendency to flair up. In the interim, this dog is reasonably comfortable although has a tendancy to limp in the fore. The dog is a lovely Rotty and is 4 years old, a wonderful disposition and a happy, alert dog.

Hi Willow. It's too many pages of posts to go through I know. I probably would only skim read a portion of it if I was coming in new to it, myself. But just to clarify and answer to your post - it was made fairly clear throughout the thread that there are trainers, and then there are trainers, regardless of what camp they sprung from. It is the course topics each of the two orgs (NDTF -vs- Delta) cover and give experience with that is truly the point of discussion here. Conversation just tends to meander a bit, especially when something has been answered earlier in the piece .

Yes - I've see a picture of them. I was too late for the raffle that was going (recently) . But I do intend to contact Ruthless to sort out a 'special' collar for my boy. My previous girl "Kal" had a collar specially made for her. It is tucked away in a special place and it is special to me. It's hers and something stops me from wanting any other dog (even my precious current boy) from wearing it. Silly sentimentality, I suppose .

I agree that everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but if they are going to express it publicly why shouldn't the flaws (or otherwise) in that opinion be discussed? Otherwise, what's the point of that opinion being expressed publicly anyway? I think the OP's question was fairly clearly and well answered inside the first page or two of this thread. That is : NDTF teaches all four quadrants of learning/training. Delta not only doesn't but also has its own agenda which prohibits the discussion and use of certain training methodologies and training tools.

Which survey was that one, Corvus. Do you have a link or would you otherwise direct me to it please? Especially interested in the "have or would use a prong collar ... " . I'm still interested to know which survey you are talking about here, Corvus and where I might be able to source it please?

Similar to my question about the stress of reinforcement being withheld -vs- use of an aversive instead. No one has answered that one either. It might not have been meant that way, but I am VERY familiar with the terminology of "the easy way out" as though it is distasteful and lazy. It is wording that is commonly used by those who do not condone using aversives inside of training of any dog and usually follows the end of a lengthy discussion when there is nothing else that can be said by them to debate the points of the subject matter. It is often used as propeganda language, not that I am suggesting its use within this thread was intended that way. If the dog is unharmed and learns more easily and quickly, so what if it is "easier" for the handler? IMO that's the way it should be and would have to benefit both dog and person.

One of the things that is 'wrong' with this 'picture' that you've painted is that you've talked about the possibility of a "possibly poorly timed "attack" from the dog's handler when (I assume) you are talking about, say, a correction chain (for example). Yet you've not mentioned about poorly timed "attacks" from the handler when they have their dog on a head collar? Are you comparing apples with oranges here? You said the "aversive" is in direct proportion to the dog's attempts at pulling". So, it's ok to apply an aversive that is enough to make it work? Is that what you mean? But the same applies for check chains, PPCollars, E-Collars. Ever had anyone pinch under your armpit? Ouch! I see a number of dogs the same (in head collar). But I see plenty enough that are not. I see a number of dogs happy in their martingales; flat collars; check chains; PPCollars (from yesteryear); E-Collars that also look happy, owners look happy, everyone is happy. I've not ever seen a dog go to the length and breadth of trying to scrape these items off when they've been put on to any where near the extremes that I've seen them do with head collars though. But this is beside the point. Courses? Why would anyone not want to learn the lot if they want to make an educated decision rather than follow a "belief system" that made them feel better.

I wasn't talking about "poorly timed reinforcers". Remember, the hypothesis is that the handler is good at what they do (timing etc). The other side to the coin of Reward based training is that if the dog doesn't do what it was asked so the reward is withheld. What do people think on the stress levels of that occurrence by comparison to the stress levels a physical correction might have on a dog? Remember, I'm talking about "all things being equal" which, if we are going to compare apples with apples, we have to. If the person hasn't had prior training or knowledge, how do they know the advantages or disadvantages of "their belief system" (and should dog training be about a human's "belief system" or should it be about what works best for dogs in the best interest of dogs?) if they haven't been taught to understand all quadrants? NDTF isn't about "belief systems" .... it isn't a religion or cult mentality that tells people what to think. It teaches so that people can become knowledgeable enough to begin to make up their own minds based on direct learning and experience. To choose to learn about anything doesn't mean you should want to do it frequently. How do you know what's best for the dog if you don't know about the 'other'? I often go to seminars/workshops etc at any opportunity I can grab. From the majority of them I usually come away with something 'extra'. Whether that's a lot of 'extra' or not doesn't really matter (although it is nice). On the odd occasion I've gone to places and what I might have learnt might even be so small as to just confirm that I'm on the right track with my thinking. But that can be very valuable in itself.

Always? On what statistics do you figure "always" ? I know you do a lot of scientific reading and much of what you base your opinions on seems to come from that, so I'm presuming you have docs that back up what you've said? What you've said here : seems to be contradictory to what you've said almost directly after that here : But I wasn't and I didn't. I asked this : Intended or not, you side stepped that question fairly well. But it wasn't directed at you specifically - it was directed at anyone who wants to answer it directly. I could agree. Although what you've said doesn't go to the 'exclusion of P+' discussion in this thread.

Why do you have to respond in this way? Makes you sound as though you think you're really smart - smarter than everyone else. Quite off-putting. Well, that's interesting. Because earlier you said that sometimes P+ has its place (not quoting verbatem). Yeah - although not sure of relevance for thread. How many have you met? But aside from that, the thread is about what the courses teach (or don't teach). It isn't about individual trainers. Ditto to what I just said. Back patting? :D We're talking courses and the agendas on those courses. Perhaps your solution is to not read the threads?

Something that is "easy" doesn't mean that it is the worst, for the dog, I mean. I use a lot of positive in training. But I'd like to know from people what they think "positive" does and whether they believe the stress on the dogs is less than the stress that the delivery of a P+ might create? I'm talking all things equal - ie assume the training practices (ether it be by R+ only, so to speak, or P+ eg physical correction in combo with R+ ) are being performed by experienced and qualified trainers. ETA: But I see that's what you would personally prefer for yourself, and that's fair enough.

You might have missed this post, Sas (refer under). I agree that leadership is a very necessary component in this situation.