Excrutiatingly Stubborn Dog

[corvus]

Out of interest why wouldn't you dream of correcting a dog that's easily put off because it would only take a very mild correction in that case to have an effect perhaps even a little leash pop and a verbal to correct easily put off dogs?

I can think of plenty of reasons why I wouldn't. Why would I?

[PetSitters]

Out of interest why wouldn't you dream of correcting a dog that's easily put off because it would only take a very mild correction in that case to have an effect perhaps even a little leash pop and a verbal to correct easily put off dogs?

I can think of plenty of reasons why I wouldn't. Why would I?

The reason I ask is in my job, I am hired to walk and exercise dogs which are the result of other people's training strategies and it's quite interesting what I find. There are a lot of dogs with basic obedience training on the purely positive strategy where in their training process, check chains were not permitted etc with the dogs never experiencing consequence with the pupils from these training groups heavily influenced upon the potentially ill effects of compulsion based training.

We know that positive motivational training does work and there is no question when carried out properly it will result in a well behaved obedient dog, but for many pet owners the process is cumbersome and takes a lot of time and understanding to train the different pieces of the jigsaw and fit these pieces together to get the result they require and in that process, they often give up on their training and resort to the management strategy of a partially trained semi obedient dog and accept that the level of obedience they have attained for their particular dog is the best it gets.

One example of many similar I have encountered was a 2 year old Rotty I was hired to exercise for the owner recovering from knee surgery with the dog prepared for his walk and exercise on a harness. I questioned why the harness? and was told that he can pull badly on the leash and being a strong Rotty her training group recommended the harness, as a collar was potentially detrimental to his neck and because of his bodily strength it was likely a collar would collapse his wind pipe requiring surgery along with the handler fallout from suffering a collar related trauma?

The dog was every bit as described on the leash, a cronic puller and a little bit insecure on the street for gaining effective food focus and by the end on his session I returned him feeling quite tattered and torn and not really looking forward to his afternoon walk I had been hired to complete. To cut a long story short after much discussion and debate she finally agreed to a training session with a prong collar whereby after 30 minutes on the prong we were able to settle him enough to gain some food focus where he would take a treat and by the second session on the prong and food lure we were establishing a focused heel.

Yes, I could have retrained this dog without a prong starting from scratch in the back yard and easing him onto the street in the same context as her previous trainer's anti compulsion regime and from a business perspective made a lot more money from this customer retraining in a purely positive fashion, but the dog being heavily learned in poor leash behaviour without consequence in the circumstances I felt was more effectively rehabilitated on the prong to break the cycle he had previously learned and start again.

I exercised this dog a couple of weeks ago, 3 months after his first session on the prong and was a dream to walk now on a martingale collar and is a nicely obedient happy boy

I can honestly say that the only collar my working line GSD has worn is a flat collar or locked fursaver trained from 8 weeks old with motivational training only and unless he begins to really blow me off on commands beyond his 15 months of age now, I don't think I will ever need to apply complusion the way he is coming along, also my young boy has a tendency to become aggressive with compulsive handling being a path we don't need to take with him.

That said and the purpose of my post, is that I have noticed the concepts of purely positive type training is often taken way too far beyond the real effects of compulsion using the absolute extremes of handler abuse in these methods as an example to scare people into false beliefs to the point of managing poorly behaved dogs as a result. It doesn't seem to matter to some of these hard core motivational trainers that the dog is shockingly disobedient as long as the training process didn't include the use of compulsion tools or the dog learning consequence they seem happy with partial obedience and tools of management like head collars and harnesses just to enable owners to have reasonable control and partial enjoyment of walking their semi obedient dog. It's not about how well the dog turns out in their training process as the priority, it's about the training method and the fact they don't use compulsion as the marketing strategy they hang their hats on which I think is a bit sad?

It reaches a point sometimes where positive trainers will admit that complusion to some degree has worked well on particually difficult dogs, but on the flip side will support their lack of results with that dog on the basis the trainer using complusion measures who fixed the dogs behaviour placed the dog at great risks and was an irresponsible trainer by doing so even though they achieved the desired results without negative side effects on the dog?

I love motivational training especially with a high drive dog it's fantastic there is no comparison between total compulsion based training on a choker chain, but when it gets too silly and biased towards method over results who ultimately suffers from this scenario is the dog at the end of the day.

Edited May 28, 2011 by PetSitters

[corvus]

We know that positive motivational training does work and there is no question when carried out properly it will result in a well behaved obedient dog, but for many pet owners the process is cumbersome and takes a lot of time and understanding to train the different pieces of the jigsaw and fit these pieces together to get the result they require and in that process, they often give up on their training and resort to the management strategy of a partially trained semi obedient dog and accept that the level of obedience they have attained for their particular dog is the best it gets.

How well behaved your dog is tends to come down to your criteria and consistency rather than what method you use IMO. When we stick to criteria, so do our dogs. It's not really that difficult. Most people just don't pay a lot of attention to exactly what their dog is doing or what they are doing and don't have the motivation to learn to. I'm often grumbling at my partner for rewarding behaviour that doesn't meet criteria and muddying cues. He thinks I'm a criteria bore. He understands why I'm such a nazi about it, but he doesn't care if his dogs aren't precise. I care, but most people don't. Near enough is good enough. Little wonder their dogs appear semi-trained.

Incidentally, consequences for behaviour are not just aversive. My dogs behave and the consequence is they often get rewarded.

[bedazzledx2]

Huh???? Sorry Joe but I am an obedience judge and it makes no difference to me how a dog is trained when I am judging. Whilst I personally am a positive trainer I make no judgments on a training method whilst judging. A dog and handler will score high points for accurate work which reflects the Guide to Judges as laid down in the rule book.

and just for the record too many people assume an e-collar and an electric fence feel the same. They don't, they never will and actually work on a different level.

And yes I have tried both. The electric fence left me with the chest pains not the high level e-collar.

It's actually VERY hard to have harmfull fallout from punishers. We seem to equate the with how the user thinks and hence we blow them out of propertions. If someone tells you off a few times do you fall apart, never leave your room and cry for days on end? It is incredibly difficult to permanently ruin a dog. You have either totally stuff up critical period or treat it so cruely it's beyond normal comprehension with really really bad genetics to have the 'ruined' dog so many people talk about.

Remove the fear and doubt from dog training and you will get further then you imagine.

This fallout is sales talking for the positive trainers to give reason why their methods is better. Originally the motivational training getting popular because the dog has more spark in the trial and getting better points from the judge is how it starting then anti correctioning mob got hold of it and sell it for no corrections kind and gentle training. It had nothing to do with no corrections and kind and gentle to begin, its for scoring higher points in obedience routine on the trial.

Joe

Edited May 28, 2011 by bedazzledx2

[sas]

Pet Sitters,

Food for thought....

Your dog is not blowing you off, could it be that it's actually shutting down.

Aggression when giving complusion, could your dog be showing frustration because it doesn't know how to handle its' frustration?

[PetSitters]

We know that positive motivational training does work and there is no question when carried out properly it will result in a well behaved obedient dog, but for many pet owners the process is cumbersome and takes a lot of time and understanding to train the different pieces of the jigsaw and fit these pieces together to get the result they require and in that process, they often give up on their training and resort to the management strategy of a partially trained semi obedient dog and accept that the level of obedience they have attained for their particular dog is the best it gets.

How well behaved your dog is tends to come down to your criteria and consistency rather than what method you use IMO. When we stick to criteria, so do our dogs. It's not really that difficult. Most people just don't pay a lot of attention to exactly what their dog is doing or what they are doing and don't have the motivation to learn to. I'm often grumbling at my partner for rewarding behaviour that doesn't meet criteria and muddying cues. He thinks I'm a criteria bore. He understands why I'm such a nazi about it, but he doesn't care if his dogs aren't precise. I care, but most people don't. Near enough is good enough. Little wonder their dogs appear semi-trained.

Incidentally, consequences for behaviour are not just aversive. My dogs behave and the consequence is they often get rewarded.

Yes, I agree entirely with this too, it's exactly what happens, but what I mean is that I have noticed for the amount of work people are prepared to put into their obedience training, the dogs trained more traditionally on chokers for example seem to have a higher level of leash obedience than the one's that aren't for a similar amount of training time. The motivationally trained dogs unless the handler like in my case walking someone else's dog knows the format trained on that particular dog to gain focus and control, they don't respond well to leash management as does a more compulsion based leash trained dog when their training is incomplete.

People who aren't prepared to put the training time in for one reason or other tend to become lost more in the motivational training process and seem to give up faster resorting to management tools as I mentioned like harnesses and head collars to get by from I guess is a lack of fast results and loss of interest?

Then on the other hand I have a couple in training one on a head collar with the bait bag and clicker and we continue a specfic training format in the owners abesence which is interesting working other trainer's routines. Some routines I have worked have some good points in motivational leash obedience but others are simply method based routines modelled to avoid subjecting the dog to complusion presenting a long winded way to achieve something that with the application of mild compulsion would otherwise be a simple exercise for the dog and owner to learn.

[PetSitters]

Pet Sitters,

Food for thought....

Your dog is not blowing you off, could it be that it's actually shutting down.

Aggression when giving complusion, could your dog be showing frustration because it doesn't know how to handle its' frustration?

No, he hasn't blown off my commands yet, he is quite good so far

He's from a line of dogs who have a predisposition for handler aggression when rampled up from harsh compulsion so we don't train him along that path. My husband tried it once calming him with a correction instead toy focus as I use when he's ramped up and he came back at him with a nip on the chest. He's definitely not a dog you would try and alpha roll

Edited May 28, 2011 by PetSitters

[corvus]

Yes, I agree entirely with this too, it's exactly what happens, but what I mean is that I have noticed for the amount of work people are prepared to put into their obedience training, the dogs trained more traditionally on chokers for example seem to have a higher level of leash obedience than the one's that aren't for a similar amount of training time.

Really? By what measure do you judge leash obedience? How do you know the time spent training is comparable? How do you know the dogs' learning ability is comparable, or the trainers' skill is comparable? How do you know this isn't an artefact of the skill and preferences of the professional trainers in your area? In my area most puppy schools recommend walking puppies on head collars or no-pull harnesses. It's not surprising to me that there are a lot of dogs around that are walked on those tools. I don't think it necessarily reflects a trend in training methods or their effectiveness.

People who aren't prepared to put the training time in for one reason or other tend to become lost more in the motivational training process and seem to give up faster resorting to management tools as I mentioned like harnesses and head collars to get by from I guess is a lack of fast results and loss of interest?

If only. I see A LOT of dogs that get roused on, leash popped and smacked when they misbehave. I'd rather see them on management tools. The punishments don't seem to be helping at all. Their timing is terrible and they are punishing dogs for emotional state or arousal most of the time. All it does is distract them or bring them down a notch it if does anything at all.

Some routines I have worked have some good points in motivational leash obedience but others are simply method based routines modelled to avoid subjecting the dog to complusion presenting a long winded way to achieve something that with the application of mild compulsion would otherwise be a simple exercise for the dog and owner to learn.

What makes you think that speed is all that matters? I do a lot of clicker training. As Kathy Sdao says, behaviour is our currency. We want our dogs to be very comfortable offering behaviours. Suppressing behaviours is therefore counter-productive to our aims. What's more, I don't even consider punishment a viable option if I can't guarantee I can do it every time the behaviour occurs. Besides which, I'm not sure what you mean by motivational leash obedience, but I find training with rewards to be just as quick as training with punishments. If there's no change within a session, I question my methods regardless of what they are.

[bedazzledx2]

Here's another thought...pulling on the lead is not the be all and end all of having an obedient dog!! shock horror I consider my dogs to be as obedient as I need them to be. I use opposition reflex and things like restrained recalls to build speed and drive for other behaviours, so if they pull a bit on the lead then I live with it. Heel is a specific behaviour taught for competition and I don't ask for it unless I really need it. Loose leash walking is optional so long as they don't pull my arm off!!

We train what we need and my definition of an obedient dog is a reliable fast recall. Others may be different but I get frustrated when pulling on the lead, or not, is seen to be the essence of an obedient dog.

[PetSitters]

Yes, I agree entirely with this too, it's exactly what happens, but what I mean is that I have noticed for the amount of work people are prepared to put into their obedience training, the dogs trained more traditionally on chokers for example seem to have a higher level of leash obedience than the one's that aren't for a similar amount of training time.

Really? By what measure do you judge leash obedience? How do you know the time spent training is comparable? How do you know the dogs' learning ability is comparable, or the trainers' skill is comparable? How do you know this isn't an artefact of the skill and preferences of the professional trainers in your area? In my area most puppy schools recommend walking puppies on head collars or no-pull harnesses. It's not surprising to me that there are a lot of dogs around that are walked on those tools. I don't think it necessarily reflects a trend in training methods or their effectiveness.

People who aren't prepared to put the training time in for one reason or other tend to become lost more in the motivational training process and seem to give up faster resorting to management tools as I mentioned like harnesses and head collars to get by from I guess is a lack of fast results and loss of interest?

If only. I see A LOT of dogs that get roused on, leash popped and smacked when they misbehave. I'd rather see them on management tools. The punishments don't seem to be helping at all. Their timing is terrible and they are punishing dogs for emotional state or arousal most of the time. All it does is distract them or bring them down a notch it if does anything at all.

Some routines I have worked have some good points in motivational leash obedience but others are simply method based routines modelled to avoid subjecting the dog to complusion presenting a long winded way to achieve something that with the application of mild compulsion would otherwise be a simple exercise for the dog and owner to learn.

What makes you think that speed is all that matters? I do a lot of clicker training. As Kathy Sdao says, behaviour is our currency. We want our dogs to be very comfortable offering behaviours. Suppressing behaviours is therefore counter-productive to our aims. What's more, I don't even consider punishment a viable option if I can't guarantee I can do it every time the behaviour occurs. Besides which, I'm not sure what you mean by motivational leash obedience, but I find training with rewards to be just as quick as training with punishments. If there's no change within a session, I question my methods regardless of what they are.

I began in the era when all the obedience schools used choker chains to the present trend where most schools don't allow them and as you mentioned often recommend head collars and harnesses for puppies now.

What I am using as a measure is an observation from 21 years ago when I began walking and managing other people's dogs or pound and shelter dogs, the dogs that had been through obedience schools trained on choker chains as they did then were fairly good in leash obedience, you could tell instantly within 20 metres if the dog was leash trained or not and by memory back then an obedience course was around 6 training sessions and they had to pass a routine.

You would think with today's understanding of animal behaviour and how the training methods have evolved for the better, a dog that has been through obedience school would be a whole better in leash obedience than they were 20 years ago, but infact my observation for the most part they are worse. I can't recall any dogs that attended obedience training for 3 months that were not almost centimeter perfect in leash obedience, where the equivilent now of 3 months obedience training many are still terrible on leash is what I have noticed more and more frequently and wonder why this is happening?

[PetSitters]

Here's another thought...pulling on the lead is not the be all and end all of having an obedient dog!! shock horror I consider my dogs to be as obedient as I need them to be. I use opposition reflex and things like restrained recalls to build speed and drive for other behaviours, so if they pull a bit on the lead then I live with it. Heel is a specific behaviour taught for competition and I don't ask for it unless I really need it. Loose leash walking is optional so long as they don't pull my arm off!!

We train what we need and my definition of an obedient dog is a reliable fast recall. Others may be different but I get frustrated when pulling on the lead, or not, is seen to be the essence of an obedient dog.

Pulling on the leash is high on the agenda for most pet owners and the first problem that causes many not to walk their dogs and leave them in the back yard especially large dogs that are physically challenging.

[huski]

When I go to obedience trials or clubs I still see quite a few - even the majority - of people who still use check chains on their dogs, and I have to say, very few if any of the dogs that are trained on check chains would be what I call highly reliable or have the working attitude I like to see in my dogs.

I don't understand why some people have such a black and white view of dog training - it seems in these threads that there is only two options for training methods - correction based or 'motivational' training and no in between. All of my training is reward based but that doesn't mean my dogs are never corrected or given consequences... leash corrections are not the only form of correction available.

[corvus]

What I am using as a measure is an observation from 21 years ago when I began walking and managing other people's dogs or pound and shelter dogs, the dogs that had been through obedience schools trained on choker chains as they did then were fairly good in leash obedience

Mine wasn't. She walked on a loose leash, but almost never in the heel position where I had been taught she should be. My parents' dog was a disaster on a choke chain. Their previous dog was trained the same way and was rarely ever walked on leash as she stuck close without one. I just don't think you can make broad generalisations. There are lots of reasons why a trend might appear to be present when it actually isn't.

You would think with today's understanding of animal behaviour and how the training methods have evolved for the better, a dog that has been through obedience school would be a whole better in leash obedience than they were 20 years ago, but infact my observation for the most part they are worse. I can't recall any dogs that attended obedience training for 3 months that were not almost centimeter perfect in leash obedience, where the equivilent now of 3 months obedience training many are still terrible on leash is what I have noticed more and more frequently and wonder why this is happening?

I doubt it's a methodology issue. More likely a criteria/priorities/training skill issue.

[Aidan3]

You would think with today's understanding of animal behaviour and how the training methods have evolved for the better, a dog that has been through obedience school would be a whole better in leash obedience than they were 20 years ago, but infact my observation for the most part they are worse. I can't recall any dogs that attended obedience training for 3 months that were not almost centimeter perfect in leash obedience, where the equivilent now of 3 months obedience training many are still terrible on leash is what I have noticed more and more frequently and wonder why this is happening?

You must have had some outstanding obedience clubs in Adelaide 20 years ago. Is Adelaide particularly progressive in the move to positive training methods these days? My friends in SA tell me that more traditional style classes are still the norm over there. I know that the move has been gradual down here, and the standard is perhaps not as high as it could be. Clubs were training with traditional methods since the post-war period, so they had a long time to perfect their methods. Most clubs are now changing from those methods to positive methods for a variety of reasons, I don't think politics plays much of a part because they certainly made it very difficult for the "dissenters" who wanted to see more positive methods allowed in classes.

[huski]

I certainly wouldn't say the majority of people at obedience clubs and competitions here in QLD use "modern motivational methods". Many (if not most) use check chains and leash corrections even though clubs do allow the use of food and toys they don't use what I would consider "modern" positive methods.

Edited May 29, 2011 by huski

[Aidan3]

Positive methods are, very broadly speaking, slower to start off with. They are not always intuitive for people in our society (although that is changing). There are no obedience clubs or pet training classes that are set up to provide maximally efficient training using these methods (not even close). In the long run, IMHO they are more efficient. Once you have a base of learning and there are expectations, norms, and boundaries, everything becomes much faster.

For some of these reasons, most instructors or trainers will include some level of aversion or response prevention in their structures (e.g long lines, head halters, collar pops).

[Diva]

I don't understand why some people have such a black and white view of dog training - it seems in these threads that there is only two options for training methods - correction based or 'motivational' training and no in between. All of my training is reward based but that doesn't mean my dogs are never corrected or given consequences... leash corrections are not the only form of correction available.

agree, the black and white view is tedious. I'm yet to meet a purely positive trainer even though the Canberra clubs are pretty progressive.

[corvus]

I'm yet to meet a purely positive trainer even though the Canberra clubs are pretty progressive.

I've never met one, either. :p Got pretty close in agility, but they never claimed to be purely positive.

Funny thing, I was watching one of the dog park locals that has very well trained, very lean Labs. He teaches his pups with food, then once they know what they're doing he weans them off the food and if they do the wrong thing they get verbally reprimanded. I was feeling impressed with his dogs' behaviour and thought that he must think my dogs aren't all that well behaved because he has criteria that I don't worry that much about. My dogs are allowed to say hello to other people in the park, for example. But then it occurred to me that one of his dogs in particular stops by to say hello to us just about every time regardless of the fact she gets sternly told off for it. She checks our treat pouches and we never ever give her anything. When I hear that tone it creates an expectation for obedience and I see it even when it's not there.

[PetSitters]

When I go to obedience trials or clubs I still see quite a few - even the majority - of people who still use check chains on their dogs, and I have to say, very few if any of the dogs that are trained on check chains would be what I call highly reliable or have the working attitude I like to see in my dogs.

I don't understand why some people have such a black and white view of dog training - it seems in these threads that there is only two options for training methods - correction based or 'motivational' training and no in between. All of my training is reward based but that doesn't mean my dogs are never corrected or given consequences... leash corrections are not the only form of correction available.

The only black and white views from what I have seen stem from the positive trainers in all cases. I don't know anyone who trains in pure compulsion or markets that they won't use a clicker, won't use a treat or won't train motivationally, it's the positive trainers who master the "wont's". Won't use check chains, won't use prong collars, won't use Ecollars, won't correct a dog, won't issue consequence along with the statements of negativity against trainers who do use complusion when required and of course the scare campaign of the fallout and injury potential of using compulsion and tools of that nature fills their marketing campaigns.

To be thruthful on the matter, the purely positive is where the black and white views start and finish?

[PetSitters]

You would think with today's understanding of animal behaviour and how the training methods have evolved for the better, a dog that has been through obedience school would be a whole better in leash obedience than they were 20 years ago, but infact my observation for the most part they are worse. I can't recall any dogs that attended obedience training for 3 months that were not almost centimeter perfect in leash obedience, where the equivilent now of 3 months obedience training many are still terrible on leash is what I have noticed more and more frequently and wonder why this is happening?

You must have had some outstanding obedience clubs in Adelaide 20 years ago. Is Adelaide particularly progressive in the move to positive training methods these days? My friends in SA tell me that more traditional style classes are still the norm over there. I know that the move has been gradual down here, and the standard is perhaps not as high as it could be. Clubs were training with traditional methods since the post-war period, so they had a long time to perfect their methods. Most clubs are now changing from those methods to positive methods for a variety of reasons, I don't think politics plays much of a part because they certainly made it very difficult for the "dissenters" who wanted to see more positive methods allowed in classes.

The GSD club is one still using traditional methods, but there are quite a few obedience classes operating along with the Delta classes with collar restrictions in place and anti compulsion policy and private training organisations operating in a similar fashion. Club dogs I haven't experienced any major issues with and are generally the better behaved as a rule.