Steve K9Pro Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) Shell: Enter DOL and the many many DOLers who recommended Steve to me (and I might add, not once did he have to "self promote" - I was contacted via PM by numerous people when I asked about behaviourists who recommended him to be because of what he had done for them and their dog in addition to the people who publically recommended him) - I booked the first available appointment and then waited the 3 months for that appointment to rock around. I think this picture speaks for itself: K9: I am very humbled by the way you have posted about how I helped you with Zero, the truth is though that Shell rehabilitated Zero & not me, she carried out every step I gave her with nothing sort of exact precision & dedication making sure every step was done, even the hard ones. I got regular updates allowing me to tune the program with Zero's improvement, Shell never stopped until she made sure Zero was 100%. In an aggression workshop I ran maybe 12 weeks? after we started with Zero, who was a Red Zone dog, people kept asking me why he was there? Dogs barked, growled & lunged at him & all he did was look at Shell with eyes of complete trust to see what she would have liked him to do. All my research & experience would be nothing without owners who do not give up. I am blessed with many, many fantastic clients who never give up. *************************************************** Just on CM, I watch the show at times, I will watch anything with dogs & did attend his seminar here in Sydney. Many people do knock his techniques & I woukd suggest that he has no formal training (once you have had formal training you can see that), but he is instinctual & it is clear that he does love animals & wants to help as many as possible. It is true that he shuts dogs down, but many dogs do need to be shut down in some aspects so he can be right on the money with some of his ideas. It would be fantastic if every dog I saw, I just stroked its head & it went away fixed, but in reality, many of the vets and trainers that refer clients to me feel that I am brought some of the worst dogs there are & we do get some great results, Zero being just one of those. To me these days, not much looks bad or not fixable because I am drawing on a daily average of I guess the worst there is to just plain out of control... lol.. Edited July 21, 2009 by K9 Force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 thats only your opinion as well steve. K9: yes but the important difference is that I created the program & its far from only my opinion. I didnt say I didnt agree with your method either, nor did I comment on physical force. I was commenting on the fact that some 'without force' methods are not truly that when really thought about. The word force is not always necessarily something that is physically applied but oh well, and if you think about you're applying pressure force to comply through hunger, tethering (no escape) etc. I'm leaving before you just sit here bored and pick on everything again simply because you want to be right in your own mind. K9: I am only replying to you, the results aren't in my own mind, I think they are public record now. Were talking dog training not the dictionary meaning of force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I think the point I'm trying to make is that not all training methods work for all dogs and Dr Yin's method didn't work for us. I truely believe that purely positive methods don't work for Zero and I know a lot of dogs just like him where those methods have failed. I also believe that they do work for certain dogs but I would like to see Dr Yin work with a dog who has been involved in dog fighting and trained to be aggressive towards other dogs since they were a puppy to see how fast she can get results with them (we worked for 12 months with her technique and it just made Zero worse). I know for a fact that Cesar has quite a few of these dogs in his pack and that without him, those dogs would have been euthanised. I would rather see him "force" a dog into submission and have that dog lead a long, happy life than have them PTS after years of fighting, having never had the experience of living peacefully with other dogs. Most of his cases are dogs who are beyond the help of the majority of trainers and even some behaviourists and let's face it, he does get results without physically hurting the dog, and IMO (though I'm well aware that this is the point a lot of people will disagree with me on) without mentally hurting them either. *Great* post Shell, brought a tear to my eye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huski Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) Great post Shell I love hearing Zero's (and your) story. I love how he looks up at you with total trust, you know that's definitely not a dog who is scared or fearful and is one who wants to and is happy to work for you. Edited July 21, 2009 by huski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) K9: Looking at the pics I wanted to add something that people may not think of, I have a few clients like Shell that come to me with a very aggressive dog, they not only have regressed the aggression but are now trialling their dogs. To get a dog past something like Fear aggression & then be able to add motivation & train for competition amongst a field of strange dogs takes real dedication & a dog that is pure gold. It is very hard to put into words how proud I am of these dogs & their people. Edited July 21, 2009 by K9 Force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkySoaringMagpie Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 ETA: A lot of people give "corrections" but because they're not huge or "punishing" they don't think of them at such. If you go "uuuhh" when your dog goes to pinch your donut off the coffee table, its a correction. If you change direction or stand still when the dog pulls on the lead, that's a correction.A "correction" to me is any handler behaviour that discourages unwanted canine behaviour. They don't even have to be physical. They do need to be appropriate (ie well timed, not creating fear) and effective for that dog. I recall Susan Garrett banning "Uh Uh!" at the workshop I went to, she was much more about teaching the dog the rules than constantly nagging at it for getting things wrong. Plus I think she wanted us to be clear about what a correction was. A lot of positive people don't realise they actually correct like crazy - they just do it with their voice. It was a lightbulb moment for me, and I stopped saying "I don't use corrections" after that workshop because I've "uh uh'd" along with most of the rest of the world. In an ideal world, I would have trained my dog not to do whatever I'm "uh uh"ing over, so it's a goal of mine to reduce the number of voice corrections I use. I guess if I had to summarise my views on all this it would be that I prefer to use the lowest impact effective tool available for that particular dog for whatever I am faced with. Because my dogs are pretty good dogs and I have time to spare, I will take the longer route if it means a lower impact with the same result. I say "effective" because I'm conscious of the fact that if you correct too low for a dog and keep doing it, it becomes noise and they learn to ignore it. Another reason why one of my long term goals is to shut up It may be the breed I have too, it is usually a mental game with them, not a physical one and I get much more success by stopping and thinking than by using physical correction. The "is that the best you can come up with, infidel?" look of disdain reminds me to keep it smart, not physical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I personally find it difficult to believe that you must come down on a so-called "red zone" dog hard in order to "cure" it. But that's probably just my background coming into it. Fight and flight are basically the same thing once they have been triggered. The only difference is that one is a fair bit more dangerous to a handler. Come down hard on a terrified animal and, IME, you damage your cause. Sometimes in a real big way. Don't know why that should be different for dogs. I think the only time limit Cesar is working to is his own. I know people that have successfully desensitised so-called "red zone" dogs. If they are to be believed, it can be done. Shell, I'm not talking about cringing and shaking and downright terror. I'm talking about the way some of the dogs in those videos held their ears and avoided eye contact and the subtle tension in their bodies. Stuff that I saw in Penny every now and then once I knew what I was looking for. My relationship with Penny was far from obviously damaged. She gazed at me with the same focus Zero has for you. Well, not quite. The bond you have with Zero is not an everyday one. SSM, I think that is an admirable aim. I aim to make what I want what my dog wants so that I don't have to punish, force or restrain as much. Same thing, really. As far as I'm concerned, if it wouldn't work on a lion or a killer whale, then I'll try to avoid using it. Semantics are a waste of time. What it comes down to is why use more force or punishment than you absolutely have to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huski Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) I personally find it difficult to believe that you must come down on a so-called "red zone" dog hard in order to "cure" it. Shell would class Zero as having been a 'red zone dog' - would you call how she trained him as coming down hard? Having seen how K9 Force trains 'red zone dogs' in person it's definitely not what I would consider as coming down hard, or using methods that force the dog to comply through serious pain or fear. I know people that have successfully desensitised so-called "red zone" dogs. If they are to be believed, it can be done. Isn't Shell's story about Zero proof that it can be done? I don't believe it can only be done in one way, as I'm sure most people here would agree. Shell, I'm not talking about cringing and shaking and downright terror. I'm talking about the way some of the dogs in those videos held their ears and avoided eye contact and the subtle tension in their bodies. Stuff that I saw in Penny every now and then once I knew what I was looking for. My relationship with Penny was far from obviously damaged. She gazed at me with the same focus Zero has for you. Well, not quite. The bond you have with Zero is not an everyday one. I hope that you're not implying that Shell's 'missing the magic' from her relationship with Zero as you've described how using corrections did so to your relationship with Penny. I don't know why people who are anti physical corrections of any kind always assume that they have to be incredibly harsh and forceful, or force the dog to comply with you out of fear. It's certainly not been my experience, or perhaps I don't have your insight, Corvus? I aim to make what I want what my dog wants so that I don't have to punish, force or restrain as much. Same thing, really. As far as I'm concerned, if it wouldn't work on a lion or a killer whale, then I'll try to avoid using it. Semantics are a waste of time. What it comes down to is why use more force or punishment than you absolutely have to? Unfortunately for my dogs, I've never worked with wild animals, so I wouldn't have a clue what would "work" for lions or killer whales, nor do I care, really. What I care about is what works for my dogs. I would never use more force or punishment than I have to, but I won't rule out using corrections if their use is necessary. Edited July 21, 2009 by huski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quickasyoucan Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) Shell your pics are great. Hmm wish I could consistently get that type of focus. One thing I wanted to add is that I think sometimes when people have had soft dogs of their own they don't realise that some dogs do need fair consistent correction to establish good communication and to deal with ingrained issues. I am in the UK atm and have been doing a bit of basic work with my dad's springer spaniel. He is so easy. My own dog at home is by no means a hard dog but he has had a few issues. In comparison George the springer is soft. If I had had him from a youngster without my Dad slightly ruining him, I reckon he could have been brought up with little or no physical correction. I guess what I am trying to say is I think you have to do what is right for the particular dog you are dealing with, based on its temperament, issues it may have etc. I don't view physical correction in a negative way and I think Shell's story is testament to that. ETA: I was at the aggression seminar and Zero behaved and looked like a big teddy bear. Without being told you would never have known there had been an issue. Edited July 21, 2009 by Quickasyoucan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~*Shell*~ Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 K9: I am very humbled by the way you have posted about how I helped you with Zero, the truth is though that Shell rehabilitated Zero & not me, she carried out every step I gave her with nothing sort of exact precision & dedication making sure every step was done, even the hard ones. I got regular updates allowing me to tune the program with Zero's improvement, Shell never stopped until she made sure Zero was 100%.In an aggression workshop I ran maybe 12 weeks? after we started with Zero, who was a Red Zone dog, people kept asking me why he was there? Dogs barked, growled & lunged at him & all he did was look at Shell with eyes of complete trust to see what she would have liked him to do. You were the first person who didn't look at me like I was crazy for wanting to "fix" my broken dog - when you've had 18 months of people telling you to euthanise your aggressive/evil/bad dog, having someone tell you that you can make it better is a massive thing. Most people just looked at his breed and told me you can't train a sibe. Obviously Zero is proof that you can but even now (and even after showing them his tricks - at last count he knew more than 30 commands so it's not a small list) I have people telling me that sibes are too difficult to work with! I came out to see you on the 12th July and I think the workshop was around the 14th September so it would've been about 9 weeks between visits - he wasn't 100% then and still had problems interacting with dogs who were trying to to play with him (growling a little when they bounced around him but not lunging or biting) but that was something he had to get used to because he hadn't been exposed to other dogs like that since he left his breeders and I think he was unsure about what they were doing rather than just wanting to attack them for being there. I didn't let it get to the point where he felt like he had to handle the situation so now he doesn't have a problem unless they get right up in his face and want to jump all over him - I don't let them do that because I know he doesn't like it and I know which dogs he will tolerate it from and which will be a little bit much for him. Just on CM, I watch the show at times, I will watch anything with dogs & did attend his seminar here in Sydney. Many people do knock his techniques & I woukd suggest that he has no formal training (once you have had formal training you can see that), but he is instinctual & it is clear that he does love animals & wants to help as many as possible.It is true that he shuts dogs down, but many dogs do need to be shut down in some aspects so he can be right on the money with some of his ideas. It's interesting to hear your perspective on Cesar - I had often wondered about it. I don't think i've ever met anyone who fully agrees with his tactics but then I've seen a lot of people needlessly bashing his methods because they don't understand them (or have seen snippets of a situation out of context and don't understand it fully). I like his ideas about it all being about timing and getting in to correct the dog while it's displaying the unwanted behaviour but before it gets past a certain level or it just doesn't feel the correction at all and I like his ideas about exercise, discipline and affection because it's so simple but so many people don't follow it and having a dog who isn't hyperactive is just so much easier to work with (I've learnt recently while training a friend's hyperactive dog ) than a dog that's bouncing all over the place. I personally find it difficult to believe that you must come down on a so-called "red zone" dog hard in order to "cure" it. But that's probably just my background coming into it. Fight and flight are basically the same thing once they have been triggered. The only difference is that one is a fair bit more dangerous to a handler. Come down hard on a terrified animal and, IME, you damage your cause. Sometimes in a real big way. Don't know why that should be different for dogs. I think the only time limit Cesar is working to is his own. I know people that have successfully desensitised so-called "red zone" dogs. If they are to be believed, it can be done. Shell, I'm not talking about cringing and shaking and downright terror. I'm talking about the way some of the dogs in those videos held their ears and avoided eye contact and the subtle tension in their bodies. Stuff that I saw in Penny every now and then once I knew what I was looking for. My relationship with Penny was far from obviously damaged. She gazed at me with the same focus Zero has for you. Well, not quite. The bond you have with Zero is not an everyday one. I don't think you have to come down on all red-zone dogs in order to cure them, I just think there are a lot of dogs out there that don't respond to purely positive methods and I truely believe that Zero is one of those dogs. He might not have been if he had had a different upbringing but quite frankly, being abused and neglected from the time you were 6 months old till you were picked up by the ranger at two and a half has to have an effect and obviously in his case it did. I didn't get to have the cute puppy, I got the snarling beast that puppy turned into, the one that didn't want to take food or toys from me when there were other dogs there (in his eyes) just waiting to be mauled, even after a year of working on the foundations of the exercise and having them perfected at home. Do you believe I came down on Zero to "cure" him? I did use physical corrections on him (I think that's what you mean when you say 'come down on him', that I used physical corrections?) - I will openly admit that but at the same time, my approach after going out to see Steve was a lot more subtle than it had been in the past. You will notice in the clip that Dr Yin forces the fear aggressive dog into a sit using a halti after it's been jumping around trying to get at the other dog - there was none of that with the prong collar. What I did to Zero with the prong collar was a lot less forceful than that - we would see another dog (or he would start showing me the signs that he had seen another dog, even if i hadn't seen it yet), I would give him a cue word and then turn on my heel and walk in the other direction. If he didn't follow me at that moment, he got a small physical correction and all he saw was me being calm about the whole situation and totally in charge. That correction was part of removing him from the situation and taking him away from his fear - it wasn't increasing it so the distance at which he reacted got smaller and smaller till it was non-existant. I don't think Cesar "comes down" on dogs that much either. When you've had the bucking broncho dog who is lunging at everything in sight and you've got so stressed out that you've pulled him around by the neck or gotten so frustrated that you've yanked on that leash (and let's face it, the majority of people have done it at one time or another even if their dog isn't aggressive or fearful), what Cesar does isn't as forceful or as "violent". I personally would never use some of his methods - I would never alpha roll a dog for example - but after watching the owner's reactions to their dog's behaviour (and their blatant over-correcting at the wrong times), a lot of what he does is actually less-forceful than the tactics used by the owners themselves before they see him. In the end, Zero and Penny are two very different dogs with two very different upbringings and what worked for Zero obviously didn't work for Penny and vice versa - I'm sure when I get another dog, I'll have to adapt my training methods again to make up for the difference in their temprements/breed as well. I know you think physical corrections made Penny occasionally fearful/distrustful of you - I never saw Penny display that behaviour when i saw her so I can't comment on it. For Zero and I, the physical corrections have actually improved our relationship in that it gave him the opportunity to see me deal with a situation by snapping him out of that aggressive state of mind for even a few seconds and letting him think/learn. The more times he snapped out of it to see me calm and in control, the less he went into the aggressive state and the more focused on me he became. I never got close to that level of focus out of him with food/toys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkySoaringMagpie Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 One thing I find irritating is the expression "Cesar bashing". Trainers who ID as positive trainers cop more of a hiding than Millan does on this board - and are often subject to mis-characterisation and ridiculing of their methods. Yet I don't use the emotive expression "positive trainer bashing" because posting on the internet is not bashing - as anyone who has seen a real bashing or been on the end of one will know. No-one is "bashing" Cesar, they are just criticising his methods. And if you're a hugely popular TV star, that will happen no matter what your methods are. Even if people were going to town on the guy in a total snark-fest - and I've seen that elsewhere on the internet, not here - he has enough money and prestige from his bottled Cesar dog water, contracts with Petco etc etc to keep him warm at night. And there are a ton of better resources out there than Millan. I mean, if someone shows up here asking about a red zone dog, no-one is going to suggest they sit down and watch a series of the Dog Whisperer. They'll send them to Steve (or Erny or someone else). If someone in the breeder's forum asks how to prepare new puppy owners for their new well bred puppy, we will send them to Dunbar's website. We won't suggest they watch a series of the Dog Whisperer. So why do people react so much to criticism of an American TV personality who has "don't try this at home!" slapped all over his show's disclaimer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 I hope that you're not implying that Shell's 'missing the magic' from her relationship with Zero as you've described how using corrections did so to your relationship with Penny. I wouldn't dream of implying anything about Shell's relationship with Zero or the methods she has used with him. I've known her and Zero for little more than a year and met Zero just a few times after she had done all that work with him. I don't know near enough to comment. What I was saying was that Shell's relationship with Zero is something special. I remember the first time I met them and I have to say it was not the same as the last time I met them. I would say from those tiny snippets that it has not just improved but blossomed. I don't know why people who are anti physical corrections of any kind always assume that they have to be incredibly harsh and forceful, or force the dog to comply with you out of fear. It's certainly not been my experience, or perhaps I don't have your insight, Corvus? I don't know why people who advocate physical corrections always assume that every criticism of correction-based methods implies that they abuse their dogs. Quite the contrary, huski. I have said repeatedly that it's NOT the harsh, obvious stuff that worries me. It's the subtle, insidious stuff that you don't notice until something extraordinary happens to make you realise what you're missing. I highly doubt you've had my insight, seeing as that would kinda require you to at least know vaguely what I'm talking about. I have shared that insight plenty of times, but I think you have to see it for yourself to appreciate it. Fear is a continuum and experienced by different individuals in different levels of intensity. In support of SSM, I have been contacted by several people on this forum who have told me they are too frightened to post their disagreement in this part of the forum because they know they'll be slammed and they are a fair bit smarter than me and keep out of it. I think that's really sad and people are missing out on an alternate view because of their intense defensiveness of their preferred methods. What's the point in a forum if everyone is busy making other people afraid to air their views? I saw it happen on another forum, only the other way around, and now it's lost half its members and discussions are pretty boring. The reason why I care if a method works for an elephant or not is that I don't think dogs are a "special" animal that we should do things to that we can't do to other animals just because they will let us. Obviously you can and need to expect more of a dog than a wild animal, but for all intents and purposes, they learn the same way and the reason why you can't train an elephant with a focus on "corrections" aka punishment and reasonably expect to be pretty safe around that animal most days (you can never be 100% safe with a wild animal - I've been bitten by a Willie Wagtail!) is because elephants don't like it and when they say no, it's a fair bit more serious than when a dog says no. The reason you can't train a dolphin or killer whale with correction-based methods is because when they say no they can swim away and you can't enforce a thing. The reason why I can't train my hare with correction-based methods is that when he says no, he runs in a blind panic and refuses to come anywhere near me for several days afterwards. The reason why it's hard to train a cat with correction-based methods is that when a cat says no, it walks away, claws you, and/or refuses to come near you for several days afterwards. If I corrected my benign pet rabbit I'm sure she would find a way to punish me, which would suck because, surprise surprise, I don't like being punished. An easy solution to all these problems is to strive for a "yes" rather than punishing a "no". I don't see why dogs should be any different. I think in a lot of ways dogs are harder. I damn well know when I've pushed my hare too far. It's bleeding obvious. My dog just looks mildly uncomfortable. I think it's inevitable that we will all use punishers with our animals because we are not very good at anticipating what they will do and their world when they live with us is full of things they can't do that they would like to do. I use punishments even though I concentrate on positive methods, because I am not as good as I would like to be, and because I'm human and sometimes I am impatient or lazy or have bad judgement. IMO the important thing about being a positive trainer is the attitude, not whether or not it is truly "positive" or whether or not corrections are harsh. To bring it back on topic, I don't know why we have to make excuses for CM because he works with dangerous dogs. An elephant is dangerous. Fortunately for dogs, they are not as big and dangerous as an elephant and there are therefore more options for changing their behaviour so they can live with us safely. If they have to be shut down, then fine, but I wish someone would make it clear what is being done. For the average person who is not dealing with an animal that has learnt to attack, Yin's methods are great. I know a trainer in the States who is constantly lamenting that so many people come into her classes poking their dogs in the neck and alpha rolling. If that is truly happening, then we need websites like this one to balance things out a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huski Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Quite the contrary, huski. I have said repeatedly that it's NOT the harsh, obvious stuff that worries me. It's the subtle, insidious stuff that you don't notice until something extraordinary happens to make you realise what you're missing. I highly doubt you've had my insight, seeing as that would kinda require you to at least know vaguely what I'm talking about. I have shared that insight plenty of times, but I think you have to see it for yourself to appreciate it. Fear is a continuum and experienced by different individuals in different levels of intensity. And it's insinuations that those of us who would dare stoop to the lowly and stupid (as Anita implied, people who use physical corrections aren't being 'smart') level of using physical corrections are missing something extraordinary with our animals that really gets me. I don't know why people who advocate physical corrections always assume that every criticism of correction-based methods implies that they abuse their dogs. You can't tell me that your implications above that we're missing something extraordinary with our animals doesn't imply that we have a lesser relationship with them than people who chose not to use correctional methods. Or the way you have been going on about how correctional methods create fear in our dogs - or don't you consider training with fear the same thing as training their dogs with abuse? It's the constant insinuations from "positive" trainers that our dogs are being trained with fear or our training methods aren't "smart" that gets peoples backs up. The reason why I care if a method works for an elephant or not is that I don't think dogs are a "special" animal that we should do things to that we can't do to other animals just because they will let us. Obviously you can and need to expect more of a dog than a wild animal, but for all intents and purposes, they learn the same way and the reason why you can't train an elephant with a focus on "corrections" aka punishment and reasonably expect to be pretty safe around that animal most days (you can never be 100% safe with a wild animal - I've been bitten by a Willie Wagtail!) is because elephants don't like it and when they say no, it's a fair bit more serious than when a dog says no. The reason you can't train a dolphin or killer whale with correction-based methods is because when they say no they can swim away and you can't enforce a thing. The reason why I can't train my hare with correction-based methods is that when he says no, he runs in a blind panic and refuses to come anywhere near me for several days afterwards. The reason why it's hard to train a cat with correction-based methods is that when a cat says no, it walks away, claws you, and/or refuses to come near you for several days afterwards. If I corrected my benign pet rabbit I'm sure she would find a way to punish me, which would suck because, surprise surprise, I don't like being punished. An easy solution to all these problems is to strive for a "yes" rather than punishing a "no". I don't see why dogs should be any different. I think in a lot of ways dogs are harder. I damn well know when I've pushed my hare too far. It's bleeding obvious. My dog just looks mildly uncomfortable. Funnily, I just like to look at my dog as a dog. I think it's an insult to compare him to animals that he is not. I don't think all animals are the same, what works with my dogs wouldn't work with my cat for the same reason you won't ever see a cat in the obedience ring. I'm never going to slap a leash and collar on a killer whale and get him to do heel work with me, I'm never going to train an elephant in prey drive - you couldn't train an elephant in drive because his brain is wired differently to a dog's, that alone is enough for me to see that their learning processes are different. For the average person who is not dealing with an animal that has learnt to attack, Yin's methods are great. I know a trainer in the States who is constantly lamenting that so many people come into her classes poking their dogs in the neck and alpha rolling. If that is truly happening, then we need websites like this one to balance things out a bit. To be perfectly honest, when I watched Yin's video of the "aggressive" dog the last thing I would consider her method to be is purely positive. Slapping a head collar on a dog and letting it fly and lunge at the end of the leash? Head collars are a pretty aversive tool. Watching it actually made me quite uncomfortable. Why is it that 'positive' trainers will accept the use of some aversive methods but not others? Why is letting a dog hit the end of the leash on a head collar ok but poking a dog in the neck or using a prong collar isn't? For the record, the vast majority of my training is 'positive'. I use reward based methods. With my current training program the closest I'd get to giving my dog a correction is giving her a vocal no reward marker. I don't have a problem with people who feel using correctional methods is not for them, if it works for their dog that's great. The fact is that it doesn't work for all dogs as no one training method ever will. Just as Shell experienced with Zero, more than one "purely positive" trainer told her there was no hope left for Zero and the only option would be to have him PTS - I know you know Shell and Zero IRL and I'm sure you would agree that today Zero is not a dog that anyone would look at and think he was better off euthanised. It's unfortunate if people feel like they can't voice their opinions here, although over the years I've seen many a "positive" trainer come on here and "slam" anyone who uses aversive methods. Just as I can't go on a forum that has a bias towards purely positive training and voice my opinion and expect all the posters there to accept my opinion blindly without argument, I wouldn't expect anyone who voices their anti-correctional training opinion here not to incite discussion on why. ETA: And let's face it - there aren't many forums left on the net that aren't biased towards purely positive training. I'm glad that DOL isn't one of them and we actually see more balanced discussion here instead of a blanket "e-collars, prongs and corrections methods are so cruel and abusive and incite fear in our dogs!111!" with 6 pages of posts all in agreement with the OP. I'm thankful we at least have DOL, it wasn't until I went onto other forums that I realised quite how many take a strict purely positive stance. Edited July 22, 2009 by huski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekhbet Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 So why do people react so much to criticism of an American TV personality who has "don't try this at home!" slapped all over his show's disclaime I put a similar disclaimer on my emails when giving out info to a client - this information is for the dog analysed please do not pass this on to other people. similar behaviors can be form different causes. One person goes 'oh my dog does that!' tries it and regresses the dog or doesnt fully understand what they are doing and make it worst. It's not training a trick it's dealing with a potentially dangerous situation with a stressed dog. Isn't that more responsible then 'hey go home and give it a go yourself!'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogs4Fun Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Removed due to a few nasty comments. Edited July 22, 2009 by Dogs4Fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Huski - Excellent post #34 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Not everything in life for dog human or otherwise can be purely positive. Doesn't mean that we all go around slamming our dogs. My Whippet is quite soft and her corrections are also soft (especially compared to my Dobe) by she still gets them. If me yelling a menacing, loud "NO" stopped her getting stomped on by a horse or bitten by a snake, then I am going to do it. Yes she won't like it, and yes she will look sad for a time, but as long as I reward her for all things well done, and make sure the positives outweigh any of the negatives, then it will all be good and I have potentially saved her life I use positive train for my obedience training, but if she was off lead and about to jump on someone after absconding she would get growled at, but highly positivly reinforced for returning to me. I think we need balance and I think that dogs and people alike learn to be resilient when things don't always go their way. They need to learn to bounce back from the negatives of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Quite the contrary, huski. I have said repeatedly that it's NOT the harsh, obvious stuff that worries me. It's the subtle, insidious stuff that you don't notice until something extraordinary happens to make you realise what you're missing. I highly doubt you've had my insight, seeing as that would kinda require you to at least know vaguely what I'm talking about. I have shared that insight plenty of times, but I think you have to see it for yourself to appreciate it. Fear is a continuum and experienced by different individuals in different levels of intensity. And it's insinuations that those of us who would dare stoop to the lowly and stupid (as Anita implied, people who use physical corrections aren't being 'smart') level of using physical corrections are missing something extraordinary with our animals that really gets me. Honey, you read too much into things. You know what I think when someone is so defensive? I won't tell you, because it's gonna make you more defensive. I've only ever related what I know from MY experiences and if you weren't so defensive you'd realise that is no threat to you. Either you've experienced magic or you haven't. I would never presume that every dog that was physically corrected responded the same way Penny did. That's pretty simplistic thinking. If you have magic even with your physical corrections, then more power to you. I'm hardly going to know one way or another, and I don't really care. I just want to help people avoid making the mistakes that I made. We can only talk about training from our own perspectives. From my perspective, what is so smart about punishing an animal you love and want to trust you? Doesn't make much sense to me. Punishment by its very definition is unpleasant. I certainly do use punishments. And I certainly consider myself stupid for having to do something to my dog that they don't like rather than something they do like because I just flew in the face of all my aims. Does that make me think anyone else who uses punishment is stupid? Well, that's somewhat different if they are working to their own aims, isn't it? I don't make a habit of applying my view of the world to everyone else, but what would it matter if I did? You wouldn't be able to do anything about it. Geez. You're only as stupid as you think you are. You can't tell me that your implications above that we're missing something extraordinary with our animals doesn't imply that we have a lesser relationship with them than people who chose not to use correctional methods. Or the way you have been going on about how correctional methods create fear in our dogs - or don't you consider training with fear the same thing as training their dogs with abuse? It's the constant insinuations from "positive" trainers that our dogs are being trained with fear or our training methods aren't "smart" that gets peoples backs up. My dog, huski. My dog. Repeating myself is boring. If the cap fits... Funnily, I just like to look at my dog as a dog. I think it's an insult to compare him to animals that he is not. I don't think all animals are the same, what works with my dogs wouldn't work with my cat for the same reason you won't ever see a cat in the obedience ring. I'm never going to slap a leash and collar on a killer whale and get him to do heel work with me, I'm never going to train an elephant in prey drive - you couldn't train an elephant in drive because his brain is wired differently to a dog's, that alone is enough for me to see that their learning processes are different. Oh dear, not this argument again. You're looking at the details rather than the bigger picture. This is a different argument to the one I'm arguing. It's not about the details, it's about the attitude, how you approach an animal, what you base your relationship on, how you build it. It's very tedious when people refuse to admit that dogs are animals as well. They are not something special that doesn't live by the same rules as every other animal. EVERY animal with a brain learns the same way: they try to keep the good things coming and stop the bad things. If I have a method that works on every animal including dogs, and a method that works on dogs but not much else, regardless of what the latter method entails, I'll pick the one that works on every animal. If it doesn't work, then I might explore other ideas. To be perfectly honest, when I watched Yin's video of the "aggressive" dog the last thing I would consider her method to be is purely positive. Slapping a head collar on a dog and letting it fly and lunge at the end of the leash? Head collars are a pretty aversive tool. Watching it actually made me quite uncomfortable. Why is it that 'positive' trainers will accept the use of some aversive methods but not others? Why is letting a dog hit the end of the leash on a head collar ok but poking a dog in the neck or using a prong collar isn't? I'm not even going to start because it's off topic. No one claimed Yin was "purely positive" and no one is talking about misuse of training tools. In fact, no one is talking about being "purely positive" at all. For the record, the vast majority of my training is 'positive'. Good for you. Love the quotation marks. The fact is that it doesn't work for all dogs as no one training method ever will. *yawn* Who cares? We're not talking about AllDogs as some kind of single entity of dogdom. These discussions always go around in circles. As soon as someone makes a generalisation, someone else gets on their soapbox and states that all dogs are individuals and different things work best. Uh huh, we all know that. My purpose in getting involved in these discussions at all is so simple. Gentle physical corrections permanently damaged the relationship I had with my dog. If people still want to risk it and use them, then what do I care? I just want folks to be informed, so I share my experiences and the reasons why I changed my methods. I harp on about it because it was a big deal to me and I REALLY don't want other people to walk blindly into that world and suffer because of it. What could possibly be so personally insulting to you about that? Keeping in mind that I just assured you I was insinuating nothing about other people's relationships with their dog, and if you read that into my posts, I didn't mean for you to. ETA: And let's face it - there aren't many forums left on the net that aren't biased towards purely positive training. I'm glad that DOL isn't one of them and we actually see more balanced discussion here instead of a blanket "e-collars, prongs and corrections methods are so cruel and abusive and incite fear in our dogs!111!" with 6 pages of posts all in agreement with the OP. I'm thankful we at least have DOL, it wasn't until I went onto other forums that I realised quite how many take a strict purely positive stance. It's not balanced if people are too afraid to post, is it? I get the impression there are quite a lot of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolassesLass Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Honey, you read too much into things. You know what I think when someone is so defensive? I won't tell you, because it's gonna make you more defensive. You know what I usually see as people getting defensive on the net - the use of fake nice pet names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huski Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Honey, you read too much into things. You know what I think when someone is so defensive? I won't tell you, because it's gonna make you more defensive. I've only ever related what I know from MY experiences and if you weren't so defensive you'd realise that is no threat to you. Either you've experienced magic or you haven't. I would never presume that every dog that was physically corrected responded the same way Penny did. That's pretty simplistic thinking. If you have magic even with your physical corrections, then more power to you. I'm hardly going to know one way or another, and I don't really care. I just want to help people avoid making the mistakes that I made. Oh, look, Corvus being condescending. How unusual. Oh dear, not this argument again. You're looking at the details rather than the bigger picture. This is a different argument to the one I'm arguing. It's not about the details, it's about the attitude, how you approach an animal, what you base your relationship on, how you build it. It's very tedious when people refuse to admit that dogs are animals as well. They are not something special that doesn't live by the same rules as every other animal. EVERY animal with a brain learns the same way: they try to keep the good things coming and stop the bad things. If I have a method that works on every animal including dogs, and a method that works on dogs but not much else, regardless of what the latter method entails, I'll pick the one that works on every animal. If it doesn't work, then I might explore other ideas. Your argument is that you won't use a training method on a dog that won't work on a wild animal. I gave you an example of a training method you wouldn't use on a wild animal, that works incredibly well on dogs, that doesn't involve physical corrections or punishment I don't work with wild animals, so I wouldn't have a clue what works on all of them. What I do know is what works for my dogs - I really don't care if it works on other animals. Funnily enough, 'oh dear, not this argument again' is what many of us usually think when we see you harping on about your hare and other wild animals I'm not even going to start because it's off topic. No one claimed Yin was "purely positive" and no one is talking about misuse of training tools. In fact, no one is talking about being "purely positive" at all. My point isn't about the misuse of training tools, it was why is it ok for Yin and the people who support her, to be ok with the use of some aversives and not others that apply equal or less pressure on the dog. It was in response to your comment about an American trainer lamenting the aversive methods that she sees other people using. Good for you. Love the quotation marks. I use the quotation marks because I think positive is a pretty broad a term and not specific enough for the style of training I use. Don't read too much into it now Corvus I harp on about it because it was a big deal to me and I REALLY don't want other people to walk blindly into that world and suffer because of it. What could possibly be so personally insulting to you about that? Keeping in mind that I just assured you I was insinuating nothing about other people's relationships with their dog, and if you read that into my posts, I didn't mean for you to. You can back track all you like Corvus, but your arguments are never just about YOUR dog. It's about your opinion on correctional methods, through your own experiences, and how you feel those methods are stupid, create fear in dogs, and damage the human/dog relationship. Just like you insinuated above when you questioned if I knew what I was missing because I'm not observant enough and don't have your insight to see the damage or lack of magic in my relationship with my dogs. I believe your words were "It's the subtle, insidious stuff that you don't notice until something extraordinary happens to make you realise what you're missing. I highly doubt you've had my insight, seeing as that would kinda require you to at least know vaguely what I'm talking about." But wait, you're only talking about yourself, right? It's not balanced if people are too afraid to post, is it? I get the impression there are quite a lot of them. I get the impression that there are a lot of people who post on DOL because there aren't many other training forums left on the net where they CAN post without being attacked over their chosen training methods. I don't go posting on forums with a bias towards positive training and expect that no one will challenge my ideas and opinions. The same goes for DOL Edited July 22, 2009 by huski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now