Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Cesar Milan vs Brad Pattison

Pages : [1] 2

dogmelissa
June 9th, 2008, 09:38 PM
Both are dog trainers with shows on TV, and I personally find that their styles are very different, though the outcomes seem to be similar.

Brad is the host/trainer of "At The End of My Leash", Cesar is the host/trainer for "Dog Whisperer". At The End is on Slice Network, Whisperer shows on National Geographic Channel.

Just thought I'd put up a poll - who do you like (or both) and why? Or why do you dislike them both?

My opinion:
I prefer Brad over Cesar. I think Cesar has his place in the training world, too, but I think he works with more extreme animals - the ones who have learned some dangerous habits, where Brad takes on dogs with bad habits that aren't necessarily dangerous (though some of them are).

I'm not sure that either show is the kind of thing a "typical" guardian would watch to get some tips on how to train their own animals. If you have a difficult dog, it's probably not going to help much to watch either of them, IMO - it's almost always better to find a trainer that you feel comfortable with to actually work *with* you and the dog directly.

That being said, I'd rather watch At The End of My Leash over Dog Whisperer any day of the week. :)

What's your opinion?

Melissa

angeldogs
June 9th, 2008, 09:51 PM
I like them both.different styles of training.with Brad he doesn't sugar coat anything at all.i have meet Brad and he tells it like it is.and Brad does work with aggressive dogs.

les
June 9th, 2008, 10:58 PM
I way prefer Cesar over Brad. Although they both get results and I like what both are doing, I can't stand the yelling and screaming Brad does ... personally, I just find it annoying.

Cesar is not so much a dog trainer either - I mean he doesn't teach sit, down, come ... he does teach how to be the pack leader which is probably most important =) Alright ... Cesar is my idol :lovestruck:

kigndano
June 9th, 2008, 10:59 PM
cesar but ive never seen the other guy.

i feel like he goes right to the heart of dog behavior and dog psychology, and it makes so much sense when he explains it.

just my .02

happycats
June 10th, 2008, 06:09 AM
I love Cesar!!!

Lissa
June 10th, 2008, 08:11 AM
Neither...

Cesar IMO has re-popularized fear/force based methods that were on their way out. The alpha thoery has long been discredited but with the coming of the "dog whisperer", dominating dogs is becoming more and more ingrained:sad:
http://dogpublic.com/articles/article.aspx?t=training411&sid=14&pid=1640

I've watched a lot more Pattison shows than Cesar because a friend of mine adores him and tapes them (I refuse to contribute to his (or Cesar's) ratings so I only watch the shows that others have taped). Personally I spend most of the time either laughing at Pattison's behaviour and ridiculous statements or frustrated that people are welcoming him into their home so that he can terrorize their dogs...

:2cents:

Melinda
June 10th, 2008, 08:20 AM
just by saying his name on line....in print is a "boon" for Cesar or Brad, there are consulting firms that have software continually searching the net for any mention of their names. Dog Whisperer and End of my leash are clients for one firm in Ottawa and receive reports daily of how many times their names or show is mentioned.

That said, I like both their shows and realize there is more being done than what they have time to show in their alloted time. I read both their forums for behind the scene stuff and they totally amaze me, my hats off to them for correcting behavior that 9 out of ten times land dogs in pounds or being euthanized.

*L* I just gave each of them a "boon" *L*

Lissa
June 10th, 2008, 09:42 AM
just by saying his name on line....in print is a "boon" for Cesar or Brad, there are consulting firms that have software continually searching the net for any mention of their names.

I could always try speaking in code but I don't think anybody would understand me:laughing:... Gotto break my own rules sometimes:p

Melinda
June 10th, 2008, 09:51 AM
*L* rules were made to be broken..........aren't they? *LOL*:goodvibes:

Dingo
June 10th, 2008, 10:16 AM
I don't get the channel it's on so I've never seen a whole Dog Whisperer episode, but I do watch At The End of My Leash. I'm not a big fan of Brad, I must say. He's pretty rude and confrontational, and he usually manages to turn someone off every episode. But the biggest letdown about his show for me is that it focuses on human relationships rather than dog training.

For instance, in yesterday's episode, about a 6 month old, hard to control Golden Retriever, the main focus was on mending the family's relationships with each other. There was next to nothing shown concerning training the dog or teaching the people to handle him. At least from what I've seen of Cesar he does more of that.

Also, I find it very irritating the way that Brad pronounces the word "important." Listen for it next time.

Ford Girl
June 10th, 2008, 10:28 AM
I prefer Cesar, and altho people think the whole "alfa" theory of training is either old school or over rated, I use his methods with my dog/dog aggressive girl - who is a freight train with an attitude, including his leash walking techniques (I walk 6klm one handed, she's never pulled once since we leashed her this way) and use of body launguage, and the results speak for themselves, they work wonders for me and my dog and I never have to actually alfa roll her or "dominate" her, or yank or pull or bully my dog, I do it with silence and signals, which is what he encourages. He also encourages people to treat dogs like dogs and not humanize them.

I follow his theory every day with my dog and it works. The alfa theory may have long been discredited but dogs understand it very quickly and it works, discreditied or not, you can't aurgue results. :shrug:

I have paid for so many classes, spoken to so many behaviorlist and communicators, and nothing beats thinking and behaving like a pack leader.

Just my experience with Cesar's methods. :thumbs up

happycats
June 10th, 2008, 10:48 AM
I prefer Cesar, and altho people think the whole "alfa" theory of training is either old school or over rated, I use his methods with my dog/dog aggressive girl - who is a freight train with an attitude, including his leash walking techniques (I walk 6klm one handed, she's never pulled once since we leashed her this way) and use of body launguage, and the results speak for themselves, they work wonders for me and my dog and I never have to actually alfa roll her or "dominate" her, or yank or pull or bully my dog, I do it with silence and signals, which is what he encourages. He also encourages people to treat dogs like dogs and not humanize them.

I follow his theory every day with my dog and it works. The alfa theory may have long been discredited but dogs understand it very quickly and it works, discreditied or not, you can't aurgue results. :shrug:

I have paid for so many classes, spoken to so many behaviorlist and communicators, and nothing beats thinking and behaving like a pack leader.

Just my experience with Cesar's methods. :thumbs up


I agree 100%!!!!

Buddy is a calm easy going dog, and I can control him easily with body language, I have never had to alpha roll him either. I don't even speak, he just knows by my body language what I want. (thanks to Cesar)

I feel treating dogs like people is exactly whats wrong with dogs today, why there is so much aggression, disrespect, biting,and fighting going on.

Like the saying goes "treat your dog like a human, and he will treat you like a dog" :shrug:

DoubleRR
June 10th, 2008, 11:06 AM
I also agree with Ford Girl and happycats--Cesars methods work, work well, and no dog resents it if you follow Cesars actual methods. He does not bully the dog into submission--he works with the signals the dog is sending and at the right time he acts. It works. When you see his pack, none of them are cowed or fearful or concerned about what Cesar might require of them, but they listen.

Ford Girl
June 10th, 2008, 11:12 AM
I feel treating dogs like people is exactly whats wrong with dogs today, why there is so much aggression, disrespect, biting,and fighting going on.

Like the saying goes "treat your dog like a human, and he will treat you like a dog" :shrug:

Exactly!!! His shows do only show the worst extreme cases, where he does have to go a bit further then I've ever had to, if he showed dogs that submitted right away, the episiode would be done. :laughing: He only actually alfa rolls the extreme cases, I have several seasons on DVD, and it's rare. For the softer cases he steps forward and snaps and makes animal type noises, uses his body to block, doesn't charge int he door and demand behavior, and I have never ever seen him lose control or even lose his cool. I have never seen him use fear/force based methods. :shrug:

I like how he takes what the humans say and turns it around to show them that their dogs are not humans, shouldn't be treated like humans, and how the owners affect the dogs behavior. It really is all about being a good strong confident leader, once I changed the way I dealt with thing, Dazy jumped on board. It was like a light bulb went off for both of us.

Brad's energy is way different, it's more forceful then Cesar's.

Either way I think it's important to try things best suited to your personality, and to know that if it doesn't work, try something else. Besides the Cesar methods that I use, I also use some of what the Human Society has taught me (for volunteering with the dogs), its very simular to Cesar and it works, as in leadership/body launguage/control, and these are dogs that I've never met before that have no reason to trust me. :thumbs up

want4rain
June 10th, 2008, 11:33 AM
heh, thought you might enjoy this-

http://www.google.com/trends?q=cesar+milan%2C+brad+pattison&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0

-ash

want4rain
June 10th, 2008, 11:34 AM
or this one-

http://www.google.com/trends?q=cesar+milan,+brad+pattison&date=all&geo=can&ctab=0&ctab=0&sa=N

-ash

angeldogs
June 10th, 2008, 11:42 AM
Brad in person and working with him his energy is different then on TV to me.
I spent a few hours with him and Brad showing me things well he worked on other peoples dogs.somethings seemed harsh.and he took all the loving the same dogs gave him and he gave it back.He was telling one guy to get rid of the prong collar and get his dogs nutured and get them under control.one dog had a bark collar on and he threw it beside the garbage can and when the owner went to get it he told her if she didn't leave it he wouldn't work on her dog.

Sylvie
June 11th, 2008, 08:43 AM
I agree with everything FordGirl has said!

I love Cesar. He is my hero:lovestruck: I have never met anyone who could read a dog like him!

Having said that, each individual has to do what is best for them. Not everyone can react like Cesar. Timing in any kind of training is important and also, some dogs are easier to train than others. :2cents:

dogmelissa
June 12th, 2008, 01:26 PM
My added tid-bits....

I've seen more of Brad's shows than Cesar's, but the common things that I have noticed - neither of them really show too much detail on training techniques. Both are obviously much more in-depth than what can be shown on TV, and what does get shown on TV is edited for the most drama, interest and general viewer entertainment. In the case of Brad, that's a lot of yelling and freaking people out and doing sometimes wild things (I once saw him lick the countertop to demonstrate a point about how disgusting it was to allow a dog to do it!). In the case of Cesar, that's the moment that he reaches a break-through with a dog, whether that's the 83rd time he's done something or the 1st.

Also I think the different clients that they show on TV have a lot to do with how their style comes across. I'm sure that Brad does know how to handle aggressive dogs, but those aren't his most common clients. I'm also sure that Cesar could handle counter-surfing dogs, but those aren't his most common clients.

I'm glad that everyone here can have such an open discussion about this and not be all freaked out by someone saying "I prefer this person"! It's a nice change!!

Hey Teri - what do you think about Brenda's new training ideas at the daycare? PM me if you want.

Melissa

Reality
June 12th, 2008, 03:02 PM
I've only seen ceaser so I guess I have to vote for him. Good that there is someone helping dogs who might needed help and their owners too.

want4rain
June 12th, 2008, 04:53 PM
i have seen Cesars method in action. my uncle Mike is mentally handicapped. i wont go into the details of it other than to say he is almost fully functioning but with a few... quirks, shall we say. :)

he walked into my house a year after we got Mister, took one look at Mister, completely adjusted his posture and had a dog, who within mere moments was obeying his every command, following him around like a little love struck puppy and basically begging him to command his every move with nothing other than body language. it was brilliant to watch.

-ashley

angeldogs
June 12th, 2008, 05:11 PM
i have seen Cesars method in action. my uncle Mike is mentally handicapped. i wont go into the details of it other than to say he is almost fully functioning but with a few... quirks, shall we say. :)

he walked into my house a year after we got Mister, took one look at Mister, completely adjusted his posture and had a dog, who within mere moments was obeying his every command, following him around like a little love struck puppy and basically begging him to command his every move with nothing other than body language. it was brilliant to watch.

-ashley

That would be something to see.i would like to meet Cesar.weither it's working with a dog or just himself.

happycats
June 12th, 2008, 07:37 PM
That would be something to see.i would like to meet Cesar.weither it's working with a dog or just himself.


I would love to meet Cesar and his pack!!! I so want to give Big Daddy a huge hug, I would love to spend a week-end there!!

angeldogs
June 12th, 2008, 09:53 PM
I would love to meet Cesar and his pack!!! I so want to give Big Daddy a huge hug, I would love to spend a week-end there!!

Oh ya.hug that Big Daddy would be a dream come true.

Sylvie
June 13th, 2008, 03:32 PM
I am with you Happycats, I would love to go to the compound to meet both Cesar and Daddy. Maybe one day:pray: LOL

angeldogs
June 13th, 2008, 05:16 PM
Daddy is the heart throb of the Cesar pack.

mollywog
June 14th, 2008, 03:13 PM
I have learned so much about dog training and behaviour just from watching The Dog Whisperer. I like how Caesar simplifies everything and is RESPECTFUL to the people he is working with. I always try to keep in mind his top 3 needs for every dog: 1. exercise 2. discipline and lastly, 3. affection. So many dog owners go at it the opposite way, with disastrous results.
I remember the first time I saw End of My Leash. I was actually mad at the way that Brad was treating the people, he always seems to make someone cry! I see his point but I don't necessarily appreciate his approach. :pawprint:

tleef
November 10th, 2008, 11:07 AM
We have tried a number of different training techniques with our 2-1/2 year old black lab, Lucy. She's a very high energy dog and we were to the point that we were barely walking her because she would act so aggresively towards other dogs. We had tried using positive reinforcement training as this is how I've trained my birds and it worked so well...but not as well with Lucy. There were just times that the treat was not as reinforcing as the behaviour...or she was full and the treat meant nothing. We started watching the Slice network's show "At the end of my leash" and while Brad can be quite abrasive, his methods seemed to work on the show. So...we searched his website, found one of his trainers in Calgary and signed up for a class. The difference in our dog within the first week or so was astounding...suddenly she respected what we told her. There was no more getting on the couch/bed. No more constantly barking when someone walked by the house (just a single bark to let us know someone was there)! This past Sunday we had the class at Eau Claire market and we were able to put our dog into a sit/stay, walk away from her and even offer up distractions, along with the joggers/cyclists/dogs that were already present and she stayed!!! We are delighted with the way things have turned around and I would absolutely, without hesitation tell anyone that needs help to sign up to one of Brad's Street Safety classes. The $500 charge was worth it to us and we now have the tools to continue to socialize our dog and have her listen to us without fail. FYI...we took Lucy to puppy classes and socialized her with all kinds of other dogs and still we had issues every time we took her out on a leash...this training has given us the tools to work with Lucy and soon she'll be enjoying playing off-leash with other dogs and she'll come when we call her to go home.

Mat&Murph
November 10th, 2008, 12:24 PM
I think they both have different techniques that both work. Brad thing is basicly the same as Cesar's where you take control and show your dog whose "Alpa" I like Cesar's better cause it shows more of the actual training. I do wish Brad shows more

totallyhip
November 10th, 2008, 12:53 PM
:sorry: I can't stand Brad Pattison. He uses very old school training techniques and is being investigated by the SPCA for hanging a dog by a choke collar on a tree :eek:

I enjoy watching Cesar and I think he is a very good handler with the dogs. But when it comes to tv shows (both Brad & Cesar) there is alot of editing going on and the scenes that you don't see behind the cameras. I also don't agree with some of the tools Cesar uses (prong & shock collars, electric fences) but that just me.

:rolleyes:

BenMax
November 10th, 2008, 01:00 PM
:sorry: I can't stand Brad Pattison. He uses very old school training techniques and is being investigated by the SPCA for hanging a dog by a choke collar on a tree :eek:

I enjoy watching Cesar and I think he is a very good handler with the dogs. But when it comes to tv shows (both Brad & Cesar) there is alot of editing going on and the scenes that you don't see behind the cameras. I also don't agree with some of the tools Cesar uses (prong & shock collars, electric fences) but that just me.

:rolleyes:

I have never seen him using the shock collar except in one episode he used a vibration collar. The prong collar is not so horrible if you know how to use it properly. Though I do not use this type of collar on my dogs, I do take the liberty to personally try on collars to see what they feel like. The prong is really not as horrible as they appear. The pressure is even throughout. Knowing this and also knowing how this collar is used is now less offensive to me.

I had no idea that the other 'trainer' was investigated for a hanging...

totallyhip
November 10th, 2008, 01:10 PM
I had no idea that the other 'trainer' was investigated for a hanging...

Yes and actually so is Cesar. The American Humane Society had a write up on their site a while ago about it. Its gone now however but this article talks about the lawsuit.


http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-05-dog-whisperer_x.htm

:shrug:

BenMax
November 10th, 2008, 01:13 PM
Yes and actually so is Cesar. The American Humane Society had a write up on their site a while ago about it. Its gone now however but this article talks about the lawsuit.


http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-05-05-dog-whisperer_x.htm

:shrug:

In Caeser cases he usually deals with aggressive behaviours. Brad is a complete write-off!

But what I have noticed, is that there are many trainers and organizations that do not support Ceaser's methods...in all honesty I think the reason is that they 'missed the boat'.

Nevertheless, interesting..thank you.

totallyhip
November 10th, 2008, 01:26 PM
Yes alot of trainers don't support his methods. I think that is pretty subjective just like anything else out there. Different opinions and perspectives and its up to people to judge for themselves what is right and what works for them :)

BenMax
November 10th, 2008, 01:29 PM
Yes alot of trainers don't support his methods. I think that is pretty subjective just like anything else out there. Different opinions and perspectives and its up to people to judge for themselves what is right and what works for them :)

I totally agree with you.

totallyhip
November 10th, 2008, 01:35 PM
I should add "Also using Common sense too"!!!! :laughing:

ILoveOnyx
November 10th, 2008, 01:40 PM
I think that they both have their own unique way of handling dogs. But, like what Ceasar says in the beginning of his show... "I train humans, I rehabilitate dogs"... he's not really training them to sit, heel, and roll over, he's there to get the dogs back on the right path to being calm and submissive.

Brad's ok... he needs anger management, if I was his client, I'd blow up in his face if he gave me half the attitude he gives on TV.

Anyway, I watch the Dog Whisperer almost every day when I come home from work, and I'm not complaining. Oh and you know what I think gets me hooked so much? BIG DADDY! I'm always sitting on the couch waiting for the cutie to pop out of the screen. Have you guys seen his newest addition? The blue nose pup? (I don't know his name, he didn't say) HE'S SO CUTE!

totallyhip
November 10th, 2008, 01:44 PM
I admit I do love Big Daddy too! He is such a cutie:thumbs up

BenMax
November 10th, 2008, 01:47 PM
I should add "Also using Common sense too"!!!! :laughing:

You would think wouldn't you.

K9 Love
November 10th, 2008, 06:27 PM
On a completley personal level, I cannot stand Brad Pattison. He's extremely rude, arrogant and pushy. I understand that a lot of this is for tv, but like the man in one episode I saw said: I would punch him in the face if he came to my house and talked to me like that.

Another reason I dislike Brad that isn't really a huge reason, just a pet peeve is he's a repeater and snapper. I HATE snappers and people who repeat commands; Sit, sit, sit, sit sit.. One of our number rules in dog class is NO repeating.

I don't think Brad has any type of dog perception or talent. He knows a few things that he uses and that's about it.

Now I most definitely do not agree with everything Cesar says or does, not even close BUT I am extremely jealous of his dog reading abilities. Despite the ways he approaches training or behaviourial issues, I really believe Cesar has a knack for reading dogs. Everything about it, eyes, head set, body posture, tail posture, movement etc. He just really knows how to put it all together and explain why the particular dog is feeling or acting a particular way. I find it to be trully amazing and most of the time he ends up being right.

Also regardless of my personal opinions on his training methods, I do see results and I agree with some of his basic ideologies:

It's usually the handler/owner not the dog. MORE excercise. Being consistent with rules/correction/aversion. Treating dogs like dogs. Not feeling sorry for fearful animals or any for that matter. Being a calm, confident strong leader. All of those principals I strongly agree with. Now how he goes about dealing with some of the cases? Of course I don't, ALTHOUGH I don't think I've ever seen an episode where he rolled a dog although I've heard about it many times. I do watch his show if I see it on and it's a case I'd like to see how he handles, but I don't watch if faithfully or anything. Either way I haven't seen him roll a dog, but I'm pretty sure he has.

Cesar's done a lot of good dragging Daddy everywhere with him. He's a great representative of the breed and I'm glad not only does he not agree with BSL but he speaks openly about it on his show. Cesar also really knows how to deal with the general public, he connects and explains in a way I've NEVER seen Brad connect. He knows how to use his body, and explains with analogies people understand. Having people skills is super important when working with dogs and owners, a skill I believe Cesar has more then Brad.

He's not perfect. I don't think there's anyone in the dog world I agree with fully, but a lot of his core principals I do agree with, hence why I voted Cesar over annoying, loud mouth Brad Pattison.

Dracko
November 10th, 2008, 06:53 PM
On a completley personal level, I cannot stand Brad Pattison. He's extremely rude, arrogant and pushy.

I agree with K9 with this. Even seeing the name of his show when I flick through the channel listings sends a feeling of disgust through me. As someone said in a few posts back, Brad needs anger management. His personal behavior cancels out any "good" he might have to offer owners of the animals.

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 10:48 AM
I think both are horrid.

Both use some good techniques. But those are ones that everyone uses-and are not special to them.

I don't like how Milan stresses exercise so much with out first saying that large breed pups and youngsters should NOT be running jogging etc. With out saying your dog might need to be looked at by a vet. Not all dogs SHOULD have an extreme amount of exercise.

I don't like how they shut down dogs. I don't like how they train through intimidation and threats. I don't like how the perpetuate the 'dominance' and 'pack' myths. These have been disproven so many times its not funny. BUT it 'makes sense to us humans' that it seems to be hard to get rid of. BUT just think of it this way... if all dogs just saw us as other dogs and fellow pack members/and non pack members dogs who are dog aggressive would also be human aggressive and vice versa. I don't like how they mask the behaviour and call it cured. They have simply shut down the dogs desire to tell you it is upset. Or I have watched episodes where the dog is in a state of learned helplessness. Its not in a calm submissive state.. its nearly catatonic.

But if that is what you like in a dog ;)

I also don't like how Milan walks in and 'fix' the dog. Take Victoria Stillwell, she comes in and fixes the people dog issues, then leaves them alone to fix them. Patterson goes in and meddles with things that have nothing to do with the dog. (makes good TV but it really misleads people as to what dog training is all about)

Personally I think people should look at it like the entertainment it is. Just look at Mr Milan allowing a dog fight to happen just to get ratings... (if he is as good as some people think then it should have been obvious to him that the dog was getting stressed and was giving off lots of signals that it was going to fight. AND there was not a break stick in sight....)

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 11:16 AM
I don't think that Caeser is letting the dogs fight on purpose but infact shows the reality of what he is trying to teach people. Energy and presence and how it affects others around you.

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 11:54 AM
I don't think that Caeser is letting the dogs fight on purpose but infact shows the reality of what he is trying to teach people. Energy and presence and how it affects others around you.

So its ok to let a group of dogs fight, just so you can show people that dogs can fight?

He wasn't teaching people at that moment. He was 'showing' them how much better the dog was. Oops. He told the people not to greet their dog (who was stressed and very happy to see her people) this stressed her more. Then he said 'this could be a problem' and a few seconds later there was a fight.

He could have called his dogs over, he could have told some to down stay (assuming he can actually train them to do things, not just shut them down) he didn't HAVE to let that fight happen. But he did, then he aired it. Shows an extreme lack of judgement on two parts.

I am so happy the owners declined his offer to trade dogs (since dogs are disposable and all) and are planing on going back to what they were doing (which was working anyway)

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 11:58 AM
Perhaps I missed that episode.:shrug:. Regardless, I think that he is doing more good then harm. No one is perfect - nope - no one. I don't think I ever said to let dogs fight....I can't find that in my comments.

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 12:12 PM
No no one is perfect.

BUT he does far more harm than any good.

He adovocated huge amounts of exercise. Never mentioning that dogs, like people can have issues where excessive exercise is BAD.

He trains through intimidation. He merely supresses the bad behaviour.. never fixing the root problem. (hence the issues that pop up down the road-even though they are entirely predictable, he blames the owners)

He perpetuates that dogs are out to take over your house and your life. He perpetuates all the pack nonsense that even people who study wolves say are wrong. His 'philosophy' is so full of holes you could use it as a strainer.

He tells people (in articles) that dogs don't need love and affection to lead balanced lives. Great so that is why intimidation is ok.

He seems to have no knowledge what so ever about dog body language. What he says is happening is not what the dog says is happening. He claims a dog is in a calm submissive state. But the correct term is learned helplessness. Or in more common terms shut down.

He treats dogs like the are objects. Trading them with clients if they aren't working out. He can't fix the problem but you can trade it in for a better model.

I see people in RL an on forums who need help after trying his methods. A dog just got PTS on another forum because it bit its owner after being alpha rolled numerous times. An alpha roll is a death threat. I might bite you too if you kept threatening to kill me. Poor dog, if the problem had been dealt with-instead of being 'punished out' he might still be here today.

Top trainers (who have a much higher success rate than Milan... he isn't even good enough to get published lol) and ethologists all agree that Milan has put dog training back about 20 years.

Yup thats a whole lot of good.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 12:16 PM
So Dekka I take it that you are not a big fan.:).

diandpat
November 11th, 2008, 12:27 PM
So Dekka I take it that you are not a big fan.:).

That's definitely the vibe, eh! :laughing::laughing:

Dekka obviously uses different techniques as it says in their profile that they are a trainer.

I like Caesar. He makes good sense. People are ALWAYS warned NOT to try certain techniques without a professional present.

The few things I have tried with confidence with my occasionally aggressive terrier have worked fast and he doesn't seem unhappy at all.

It's like kids I guess...not everything works on every kid.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 12:34 PM
:2cents:That's definitely the vibe, eh! :laughing::laughing:

Dekka obviously uses different techniques as it says in their profile that they are a trainer.

I like Caesar. He makes good sense. People are ALWAYS warned NOT to try certain techniques without a professional present.

The few things I have tried with confidence with my occasionally aggressive terrier have worked fast and he doesn't seem unhappy at all.

It's like kids I guess...not everything works on every kid.

I am with you. I have been training dogs for years however not certified (doesn't mean a thing) however followed clinics, hung out with police dog trainers, and other trainers that I know and gone to conferences. Also, I have studied animal behaviour and a combination of all this is very valuable. As well I have made my presence available to all those that are involved in breed specific rescues to learn more about certain breeds and how to better my evaluations.

I have to tell you that you can take what works for you and leave the rest. You cannot tell me that everything he does is not worthy...heck even the worst trainers can teach you something. That's just my :2cents:

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 12:35 PM
LOL NOT a fan.

I just get so sick at having to re educate clients who's dogs are freaked out by the 'aggressive' humans. Its pretty common when you get talking to other trainers. The only trainers I know who love him are the e collar trainers. But then they can't read dog language either.

No not all techiniques work with all dogs. But methods do. There are different ways of applying things. But the basic principle is the same. Shutting down dogs looks good for TV. But its like one of my favorite quotes about his show:

You can put a bandaid over a bullet wound on TV and call it a miracle. Doesn't seem to matter that the patient is just as dead.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 12:38 PM
LOL NOT a fan.

I just get so sick at having to re educate clients who's dogs are freaked out by the 'aggressive' humans. Its pretty common when you get talking to other trainers. The only trainers I know who love him are the e collar trainers. But then they can't read dog language either.

No not all techiniques work with all dogs. But methods do. There are different ways of applying things. But the basic principle is the same. Shutting down dogs looks good for TV. But its like one of my favorite quotes about his show:

You can put a bandaid over a bullet wound on TV and call it a miracle. Doesn't seem to matter that the patient is just as dead.

Dekka - do you get anything positive out of it being a trainer? Great last sentance BTW!

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 12:55 PM
Not sure what you mean?

I love training and showing, and helping others train and show.

I love not only my walls covered in ribbons from many many venues and various dog sports, I also enjoy the connection I have with my dogs. I enjoy rehabbing dogs with some serious bite histories for the JRTRO. I love the fact that they can go on to loving homes. I enjoy watching the success of clients.

So I would say yes I do get lots out of training (if that is what you are asking)

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 12:57 PM
Not sure what you mean?

I love training and showing, and helping others train and show.

I love not only my walls covered in ribbons from many many venues and various dog sports, I also enjoy the connection I have with my dogs. I enjoy rehabbing dogs with some serious bite histories for the JRTRO. I love the fact that they can go on to loving homes. I enjoy watching the success of clients.

So I would say yes I do get lots out of training (if that is what you are asking)

No I mean as a trainer, is there anything that you can take or like about either one of these trainer's methods or idiologies? Is there anything of value for you.

NoahGrey
November 11th, 2008, 01:04 PM
He tells people (in articles) that dogs don't need love and affection to lead balanced lives. Great so that is why intimidation is ok.

I think what he is referring how the average pet loving owner shows love and affection. By hugs, kisses, and baby talk. And he is right. in reality dogs do not need hugs, kisses and baby talk. In fact, they are not aware of what you are doing at that moment.

It is proven that dogs thrieve on working, being a member of your pack, stabablity. They want to please you..in their eyes the Alpha male.

Dogs do not care if they are hugged, kissed, etc. yes, of course they respond happy to a pat or pet on the head...a come on buddy lets go. Affection, but not going overboard. in fact, getting all mushy might make a dog wary. For, dogs do not understand.

ACO22

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 01:08 PM
ahh I see.

Yes. I often tell people who wish to learn about calming signals and dog body language to watch the show with the sound off. No where can you find so many examples of stressed dogs on television.

When people phone me and want me to take their dog and 'fix it' I use the Dog Whisperer show as an example of why that doesn't work. I tell them we need to fix you and the dog together. The issues that created the problem will keep on creating the problem unless those issues are resolved. I guess Patterson is kinda on that wavelength.. but then he drops the bar and goes off the deep end.

Other than as an example of how not to work your dog. No not really.

Anything they do that I DO like is common knowledge type stuff like NILIF. Making sure a dog has an 'appropriate' outlet for its mental and physical energy. (wait never seen either of them address metal stimulation before)

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 01:10 PM
I agree with ACO22- it's how we interpret his message. I for one never train my fosters to be 'sucky' if you will. I train them to be attentive, obediant and responsive. If the people who adopt want a sucky dog then they can do so - but I always hand over a well disciplined dog and what they do from there is their business. My own - well that's another story....yep I love her up and to be honest with you - I should really go back to basics.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 01:14 PM
So Dekka you are using common sense then. I would love to converse with you further in regards to the subject to training. I always believe there is so much more to learn as I have learnt mostly from my dogs whom have assisted when training. Perhaps we can exchange dialogue at some point. I would seriously love to pick your brain but I do not want to monopolize this thread in doing so... So what do you say?

K9 Love
November 11th, 2008, 02:05 PM
Dekka, neat to see you here. ;) Who am I? LOL. I met you at the PADOC CARO/NAMBR match a few months ago, with Roxy. :)

I agree with a lot of your opinions on Cesar, but perhaps I've missed a show where he's implied dogs are conniving creatures that are constantly looking to overthrow their owners. What I've always taken from his comments on "pack leadership" as he calls it, is that if YOU DON"T take up the leadership role, it's likely the dog will. And that is something I agree with strongly. Not necessarily that dogs want that position, in fact for some reason I believe he says the opposite. That dogs would much prefer you to be in charge, just that if you don't go about the necessary steps to earn/or take that role by default, the dog will as it's only natural to them.

As for his ability to read dogs, I saw the episode your speaking about, and I'm pretty sure he knew full well that something was going to happnen. YES he should've done something, but in his somewhat defense (as I said I don't agree with everything he does wholly either) I would think that he was waiting to see what would happen. Now should he have waited considering the dogs breed and previous behaviour? Probably not, but I THINK that's what he was doing. He knew as soon as the owners came that the dog wasn't acting "appropriately" I believe the word he used was "excited energy".

I agree that often after his flooding sessions the calm submissive state is really just the opposite, similar to a horse locking up, but I don't think he's wrong in every dog reading situation.

Also I hardly think that most people would take his advice for more excercise as mile long, hard running for their dogs. On all of the shows I've seen him say this, the owners admit to only getting their dog out two or three times a week, for half hour walks on leash. I agree with most of what you've said, honestly, but I think that's nit picking. As you said no one is perfect, we all know Cesar's far from it, but you can't agree that more excericse for JRT's getting three half hour walks a week is okay? ;)

Once again he's not my favourite, but between Cesar and Brad Pattison? I would kneel at Cesar's feet. What does that say for Brad Pattison? ;)

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 02:16 PM
Dekka, neat to see you here. ;) Who am I? LOL. I met you at the PADOC CARO/NAMBR match a few months ago, with Roxy. :)

I agree with a lot of your opinions on Cesar, but perhaps I've missed a show where he's implied dogs are conniving creatures that are constantly looking to overthrow their owners. What I've always taken from his comments on "pack leadership" as he calls it, is that if YOU DON"T take up the leadership role, it's likely the dog will. And that is something I agree with strongly. Not necessarily that dogs want that position, in fact for some reason I believe he says the opposite. That dogs would much prefer you to be in charge, just that if you don't go about the necessary steps to earn/or take that role by default, the dog will as it's only natural to them.

As for his ability to read dogs, I saw the episode your speaking about, and I'm pretty sure he knew full well that something was going to happnen. YES he should've done something, but in his somewhat defense (as I said I don't agree with everything he does wholly either) I would think that he was waiting to see what would happen. Now should he have waited considering the dogs breed and previous behaviour? Probably not, but I THINK that's what he was doing. He knew as soon as the owners came that the dog wasn't acting "appropriately" I believe the word he used was "excited energy".

I agree that often after his flooding sessions the calm submissive state is really just the opposite, similar to a horse locking up, but I don't think he's wrong in every dog reading situation.

Once again he's not my favourite, but between Cesar and Brad Pattison? I would kneel at Cesar's feet. What does that say for Brad Pattison? ;)

Oh that's funny.

I have to tell you that my speciality (for whatever reason) is dealing with dogs with aggressive behaviour (and may I add that I am a complete failure at house training...well not complete but not great either) Give me a dog with problems and I can work with it. I do take the leadership role if you will. I teach them boundries and what is acceptable and what is not. I am old school in some techniques and open to new ideas for where I am failing miserably. I adjust my methods based on understanding the breed for one and then I provide training for a dog based on his/her ability. I would never ask a dog to do something that I know is not feasible.

In saying this we use methods and techniques but we can not fix behaviour but we can alter them. I believe that Caeser does this. It is not fixing anything but it is providing the handler with 'tools' in order to reinforce a positive outcome. It is now left to the owner to continue teaching and not faultering or else we are back to square one. Anyways - that is how I see it.

TeriM
November 11th, 2008, 02:18 PM
I actually think that both trainers have some good and some bad points as do most real life trainers as well. I do hear you on the whole alpha roll thing but I believe there is something to be said for being a "pack leader". Perhaps Caesar oversimplifies the issue but even very well respected trainers (Patricia McConnell, Suzanne Clothier) talk a lot about being a leader to your dogs so obviously it does apply.

I do believe that there are dogs that don't work with ALL positive type training. Riley is perhaps one of those (gonna get flamed here I think). He is a very confident, high energy dog who really needed to learn some self control. He is not super food motivated and toys just served (especially balls) to increase his stimulation level. There is a way to combine both the positive stuff but still use some "negative" methods and get results.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 02:23 PM
I actually think that both trainers have some good and some bad points as do most real life trainers as well. I do hear you on the whole alpha roll thing but I believe there is something to be said for being a "pack leader". Perhaps Caesar oversimplifies the issue but even very well respected trainers (Patricia McConnell, Suzanne Clothier) talk a lot about being a leader to your dogs so obviously it does apply.

I do believe that there are dogs that don't work with ALL positive type training. Riley is perhaps one of those (gonna get flamed here I think). He is a very confident, high energy dog who really needed to learn some self control. He is not super food motivated and toys just served (especially balls) to increase his stimulation level. There is a way to combine both the positive stuff but still use some "negative" methods and get results.

TeriM - use whatever works. I am perhaps not the best trainer but I do pat myself on the back because I do get alot of positive results and do get called back for more assistance....and I do it for glass bottles of coke and a donation made to a shelter or rescue of their choice.

Sometimes all this positive stuff works and sometimes it doesn't. I just re-homed a dog with severe food aggression and trust me - it was not all positive training that went into it. It was patience and time outs if you will - but it worked like a charm.

TeriM
November 11th, 2008, 02:35 PM
Thanks Benmax :thumbs up.

I also sometimes am surprised that people are soooooo opposed to any consequences for bad behaviour. You wouldn't expect to be able to raise a child by only bribing and rewarding the good behaviour :shrug:. I am NOT ADVOCATING any form of abuse or beating in any way, shape or form but a correction is not necessarily a bad thing.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 02:40 PM
Thanks Benmax :thumbs up.

I also sometimes am surprised that people are soooooo opposed to any consequences for bad behaviour. You wouldn't expect to be able to raise a child by only bribing and rewarding the good behaviour :shrug:. I am NOT ADVOCATING any form of abuse or beating in any way, shape or form but a correction is not necessarily a bad thing.

Listen I have a great kid because it was not all positive reinforcement I can guarantee you that! My main ingrediant to succesful training is trust. (it certainly is not my spelling).

TeriM
November 11th, 2008, 02:48 PM
Listen I have a great kid because it was not all positive reinforcement I can guarantee you that! My main ingrediant to succesful training is trust. (it certainly is not my spelling).

I totally agree :thumbs up. Trust is so important in building a good and mutually respectful relationship with our dogs :).

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 02:59 PM
I totally agree :thumbs up. Trust is so important in building a good and mutually respectful relationship with our dogs :).

And now I am learning to apply this to people....:offtopic:

TeriM
November 11th, 2008, 03:05 PM
:laughing::laughing: animals are much easier and generally much more deserving of our trust :D.

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 03:29 PM
Hey.. I remember you.. And your gorgeous dog. Are you going to the Rally at Superdogs on the 23?

I am all for a leadership role. Someone has to lead the dance. BUT not because I am the bigger, meaner, nastier dog. I lead because I am the controller of resources.

I am a leader of dogs, not a pack, as domestic dogs don't pack.

As I said the stuff I do like is not unique to him, nor is it new. I do not think it is acceptable for ANY TRAINER to risk serious injury to dogs, just to see what will happen. That is totally irresponsible. I loved how the owner of the dog was smart enough to grab the little dog and keep it out of the fight. She had better instincts than Mr Dog Whisperer herself.

I have dogs who fight, who have done SERIOUS damage to each other. I work with them to make them 'better' but I would never ever ever just let them all run together 'just to see what would happen!' It was pretty obvious when the people walked in what was going to happen (well after they were not allowed to greet their dog).

I agree with not rewarding jumping up. BUT the dog is happy to see its owners. Think of it this way. If it had been a child staying at someomes house and it had come out running "yay you are back" and went to throw their arms around the people... would it have been apropriate to push the child away and ignore it? He should have told them HOW to greet their dog. How to teach it to greet. Then the dog could have done what is hardwired into all dogs (greet leaders) in an acceptable manner. That at least would have lowered the dog's stress level.

These are large dogs who bite and hold. Where were the break sticks? This fight actually wasn't really all that bad as fights go. BUT it was bad enough the Milan told them their dog was horrible and he would trade them for one of his. Thank goodness the people said no.



I totally agree it is trust. BUT punishing your child/dog without them truly understanding the rules is the best way to break trust. I am a mostly positive trainer. But I am not adverse to the odd aversive. BUT if you need to apply an aversive more than 2 its not effective. AND you have to be prepared for fall out. I never use averives with my fosters. EVER.

Now positive does NOT mean permissive. You can be very harsh and be positive. Ruff Love is a book that many people think is waaaayyyy too harsh, but its 100% positive. I know of a lady who did the program with one of her (very out of control dog) it worked-but she was in tears with how harsh it was for her dog! Many trainers who work with those crazy high drive impulse challenged dogs seem to be able to gain phenomenal control...all with out correcting the dogs.

IMO if you wouldn't expect a 3 year old child to understand, or you wouldnt' do it to 3 year old child then don't do it to your dog. The smartest dog on earth isn't anywhere near the average 3 year old human.

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 03:38 PM
I agree with not rewarding jumping up. BUT the dog is happy to see its owners. Think of it this way. If it had been a child staying at someomes house and it had come out running "yay you are back" and went to throw their arms around the people... would it have been apropriate to push the child away and ignore it? He should have told them HOW to greet their dog. How to teach it to greet. Then the dog could have done what is hardwired into all dogs (greet leaders) in an acceptable manner. That at least would have lowered the dog's stress level.

I totally agree it is trust. BUT punishing your child/dog without them truly understanding the rules is the best way to break trust. I am a mostly positive trainer. But I am not adverse to the odd aversive. BUT if you need to apply an aversive more than 2 its not effective. AND you have to be prepared for fall out. I never use averives with my fosters. EVER.

IMO if you wouldn't expect a 3 year old child to understand, or you wouldnt' do it to 3 year old child then don't do it to your dog. The smartest dog on earth isn't anywhere near the average 3 year old human.

But they are not children, they are dogs. I had a 130 lbs Rott and he was thrilled to see my niece of 3 years of age....no way was he going to jump or bowl her over..no way. So he was taught to sit and wait and she would first make contact.

Maybe I am way out there but I did expect my 3 year old child to listen and understand CERTAIN things based on her mental capacity so I definately expected any dog to as well based on their breed and their own personal level of intelligence.

As for my fosters, well they go to homes and behave perfectly as I must ensure that they have their basics down.

Am I unrealistic - perhaps, but I have had successes so I think my formula is working...thus far :fingerscr

BenMax
November 11th, 2008, 03:43 PM
I would love to continue however I must go. I will pick this up tomorrow as I find it very interesting.

Dekka
November 11th, 2008, 03:54 PM
But they are not children, they are dogs. I had a 130 lbs Rott and he was thrilled to see my niece of 3 years of age....no way was he going to jump or bowl her over..no way. So he was taught to sit and wait and she would first make contact.


EXACTLY!! So (as I said before) they need to learn HOW to greet people. If greeting is sitting in front of someone and waiting to be petted and greeted back... that is EXACTLY what Milan should have done. But he told them no greetings no acknowledgment.... They should be allowed to be excited to see their people. He was going on about how it was bad.

No they are not children. BUT people act like they are smarter than children.. and they are not.

I have very well trained and obedient dogs (and multi titled dogs in obedience) I expect my dogs to listen and obey promptly. But that doesn't mean they are smart enough to reason. Of course dogs are smart.. lol you should see the things my dogs do. BUT if you think of what Milan does and then think about the actual learning capacity of the dog.......

What is your 'formula'?

I dont' have one as each dog comes with its own baggage. Some are so fearful they need confidence boosts. Some are so confident (as there has been NO leadership) that they need boot camp. All the principles stay the same (set the dog up for success, reward what you want, train incompatible behaviours, and be always consistent and fair) but how its applied is different to each dog.

Every dog I have had in to be worked with was going to be PTS. Only one did go that way, but he was unstable in a very medical sort of way.

What have you trained your dog(s) to do?

K9 Love
November 12th, 2008, 12:53 AM
Yes I will be there! I PM'd Kayla to see if she would be as well. Rox got her RNMCL title in that one trial at PADOC so we'll be in advanced now. I've decided we'll skip the SFE if they are in one or all courses, but either way we'll have a blast! ;) I take it you'll be there? :D I wasn't sure if at the last trial you guys finished, were in versatility or what.

I agree 100% with being a leader but NOT relying on force or intimidation to get there. I'm all for being a kind, benevolent yet firm leader. My dogs live a structured life, more so then some, but for good reason. Roxy's issues, which you saw are odd and Hades is an APBT. So I try to keep them as in-line, under complete control with a proper balance of fun of course! LOL.

Perhaps I'm looking through rose coloured glasses with Cesar and just seeing what I want to see. I fully admit that I just don't like Brad Pattison! ROFL :D . I just can't stand him as a person so I nitpick at everything he does, haha. I guess it depends on your style of training as well. Someone who focuses more on positive reinforcement is going to find a much larger gap between themselves and Cesar, while someone who may not be as aversive or physical as Cesar but more "balanced", will still have differences, but they won't be as large.

I think the problem with people expecting things from their dogs isn't the difficulty of behaviours, dogs can do amazing things. It's the LACK of training and effort they put into it, that causes an unrealistic expectation. What's the saying; Rome wasn't built in a day ;)

I find a lot of people watch these dog training shows and think if they spend twenty minutes after the show their dog will magically transform into a different dog. Something that I do agree is a problem with the general public.

Living and training with dogs is in my opinion a life long endeavor. It never ends so to head in with a time frame in mind, or a date set for it all to be done is most definitely the wrong mind set! LOL

bendyfoot
November 12th, 2008, 01:37 PM
Just read through this thread...I find it fascinating to read people's different opinions and styles of training...a running theme I've noticed is that there is no single style/method/technique of training that will work 100% of the time for 100% of dogs. I find both shows to be entertaining, but I find CM's techniques to be most useful when dealing with agressive dogs. I'm going to comment on a few things I read in posts...



Yes. I often tell people who wish to learn about calming signals and dog body language to watch the show with the sound off. No where can you find so many examples of stressed dogs on television.

It makes sense to me to see calming signals in a dog that, for the first time in its life, is being told that its previous pattern of behaviour is no longer acceptable. This can be a very big mindshift. I saw the same reaction in my dog-aggressive pooch Gracie the first time she was corrected properly for initiating an aggressive attack on another dog. She was like, 'Holy Crap, what just happened there, this is new, and this is different, and I'm not sure I like it..." Yes, it caused her stress, but only momentarily (she was relaxed and getting belly rubs beside the other dog a moment later) and it made an immediate impression.

(wait never seen either of them address metal stimulation before)

I can't speak for Brad, but I recently saw a CM episode involving a beagle with some OCD tendendies (crazed sniffing), and most of the episode involved ways for the family to chanel his natural need to track into productive and controlled, fun behaviour.




As for his ability to read dogs, I saw the episode your speaking about, and I'm pretty sure he knew full well that something was going to happnen. YES he should've done something, but in his somewhat defense (as I said I don't agree with everything he does wholly either) I would think that he was waiting to see what would happen. Now should he have waited considering the dogs breed and previous behaviour? Probably not, but I THINK that's what he was doing. He knew as soon as the owners came that the dog wasn't acting "appropriately" I believe the word he used was "excited energy".

I saw this episode too, watched it twice, actually, because I found it fascinating. I think he suspected this reaction would happen and I think he did it for two reasons. 1, you can't always tell how a dog will behave until you put it in a situation that will challenge it. therefore, you can't know what the triggers are, what the warning signs might be, and therefore how to correct the situation. 2, I think he wanted to impress upon the owners the severity of the issue and their own role in creating these aggressive situations.

Thanks Benmax :thumbs up.

I also sometimes am surprised that people are soooooo opposed to any consequences for bad behaviour. You wouldn't expect to be able to raise a child by only bribing and rewarding the good behaviour :shrug:. I am NOT ADVOCATING any form of abuse or beating in any way, shape or form but a correction is not necessarily a bad thing.

I have to agree with this philosophy.

As I've said before, I use different techniques and approaches with each of my dogs, depending on their personalities, needs and behaviours. I am, however, consistent with my expectations of them and in maintaining my status as leader.

Dekka
November 13th, 2008, 02:45 PM
Mafia and I are both going to be there. Na I still need one leg of adv. I got 'lost' and NQ'd my last run. oh well.

You should not see so many stress behaviours if you are training. If I am working with a dog with issues and they were to do that I would know I am doing more than they can handle. I back of a bit and go a bit slower.

If your goal is to suppress vs teach then yes you WOULD expect frightened and overly stressed dogs. Animals don't learn when more than mildly stressed. This is why free shaping (a positive training method) CAN be very upsetting for some dogs.

Yes basic learning theory works on all animals. Yep some methods can work on all dogs... But the methods may need to be applied differently to different dogs. Most people I know who use much in the way of aversives are just lazy. It DOES take more effort on the handler's part to set your dog up for success. It DOES mean the handler has to be more aware and needs to be creative.

For anyone who thinks that you need to suppress dogs who are exhibiting out of control behaviour-they need to read Shaping Success. I read that and thought that dog would have had a LOT of aversives in most trainers hands.

BenMax
November 13th, 2008, 02:48 PM
Just read through this thread...I find it fascinating to read people's different opinions and styles of training...a running theme I've noticed is that there is no single style/method/technique of training that will work 100% of the time for 100% of dogs. I find both shows to be entertaining, but I find CM's techniques to be most useful when dealing with agressive dogs. I'm going to comment on a few things I read in posts...







I have to agree with this philosophy.

As I've said before, I use different techniques and approaches with each of my dogs, depending on their personalities, needs and behaviours. I am, however, consistent with my expectations of them and in maintaining my status as leader.

I agree. I am always open to other philosophies and ideas as there is always room to grow and learn. Again I will take what I want and discard what I do not find useful.

This is such a good thread full of great opinions, ideas and philosophies. All very valuable.

mafiaprincess
November 13th, 2008, 03:19 PM
Yes I will be there! I PM'd Kayla to see if she would be as well. Rox got her RNMCL title in that one trial at PADOC so we'll be in advanced now. I've decided we'll skip the SFE if they are in one or all courses, but either way we'll have a blast! ;) I take it you'll be there? :D I wasn't sure if at the last trial you guys finished, were in versatility or what.


See you there :) Cider and I finished our RAMCL, we're in 2 rounds of RX, Smudge has never trialled in anything, he is attempting one round of novice. That's a great plan. Most judges switch off their SFE's (often for the food bowls but the last trial she had both or the food bowls) so they aren't usually in every round. Seems to be in half of the advanced rounds I've ever done.

Kayla will be in Ottawa taking her exam for her training course sadly, I already bugged her more than a month ago ;)

Dekka
November 13th, 2008, 04:35 PM
One must always learn and grow. I used to be a balanced trainer. Dropped using aversives. As a the mistakes were my fault. (if I had trained properly the first time, and proofed enough, the dog wouldn't be making mistakes) As soon as I dropped it my dogs started scoring higher.

This heel was taught with no corrections....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T-WUt6k-ac

Its a much better heel than the one on her father who I did teach with mild corrections.

K9 Love
November 13th, 2008, 05:30 PM
I'm not really too worried if even all four trials have a SFE. Our venture into Rally is just for fun. :) My eggs are two baskets when it comes to getting back into obedience and that's a) a miracle from our work with SATS or b) the CKC implements the new wild card excercise that the AKC did. The latter might be cheating and the prior wishful thinking, but what can I say, I'm a positive thinker! ROFL ;)

We had an unfortunate coming too last night in class. I fuly admit I haven't been prepping for this trial, AT ALL! Ha ha! I didn't think that the food bowl excercise would be a trouble at all for Roxy, but turns out it is... She darts in front of me to GET AWAY from the bowls! So I'm going to have to do some last minute work with her, and I imagine I won't even be able to give her a "leave it" command in the trial for fear of her bolting madly away from it. I know the problem is I heavily reinforced moving/backing away from "leave its" as well as complete avoidance. *sigh* LOL :D

I'm a militant person, I've been told by more PR thinkers that I would be better off with a robot, (ROFL), I find my way of thinking with dogs leans towards the PP people I know. This is real life training, in more than high stress environments and there are times where our training is life or death.

We're mostly verbal corrections here now as my dogs are older and now that they know the rules training is a lot of fun. As it's not anytime soon Roxy will step into the ring for obedience, we do a lot of finesse work now that she really enjoys and there is absolutely no need for corrections when sprucing up a flip finish, or working on snapier hand signals.

For some reason, even though I train using mild corrections, my dogs don't "turn out" in the ring looking like an abused puppy. Every score sheet I have with Roxy, whether it be from a correction match or trial has "Nice, happy working dog!" on it, or "Great job! Having fun! That's what I like to see!". There are times when I could care less what the judge thinks if *I* feel we did an awesome job, but it just so happens the judges agree with what I feel was a good run, and they also agree when I feel we didnt'! ROFL! :D

I stopped using aversives for a number of things, and worked more on being creative and finding a more positive way to do things, but I still use aversives when push comes to shove. If a dog gets up during a sit stay, I WILL take that dog back by the collar to where they were left. Technically that is an aversive. It "dissuades" the dog from breaking the stay again.

As for supressing "out of control" dogs behaviours. I WISH I could ;) Really, I understand what your saying and I've tried supressing Roxy's behaviours with some pretty harsh aversives. Maybe it works for some dogs who end up being ticking time bombs, but it didn't even work in my situation. Roxy's "out of control"/undesirable behaviours are un-suppressable, at least to my imagination!! ROFL :D Ultimately it would be nice to change her perception, which I've attempted in many positive ways and she has no part in it. I don't have time or the sound heart to work on the issue any differently then we are now for fun with SATS. It's not my hands that are risk. My trainer is reluctantly going along with what we're doing now and she's the only person who's hands I will risk, unfortunately that's her job describtion! LOL.

Dekka
November 13th, 2008, 05:42 PM
I know dogs who have LITTERALLY been nearly killed with aversives who look happy in the ring. (you may even have seen one of the ones I am thinking of)

So how the dog looks in the ring (where no punishements can happen) doesn't mean anything. :p I know you are no where no way like those people :D But just saying.

Lots of dogs deal well with aversives. IMO they aren't necessary. LOL and I compete in obedience with working bred JRTs.

K9 Love
November 14th, 2008, 12:07 AM
The only reason I brought it up, is because you had said since you stopped using aversives, your dogs get higher scores. You can't get much higher then a perfect score ;)

Also to say that I dont' really care what the judges think. If *I* think we've done a good job that's all that matters. My last time in the ring at our first Rally match, I came out and told my mother after a big hug with Roxy; I don't care if we passsed or not, I don't care what that judge thinks. That was the most perfect run I could've imagined! It just so happened that the judge agreed, literally, but my point was, at the very core, I know when we've done good, or when we haven't. I don't need a judge to tell me that! LOL

I was having a discussion with this with a trainer who in my opinion, is one of the very best when it comes to competition obedience. Reality is, the majority of dogs who compete in obedience, in novice and some in open are wild, trully uncontrollable dogs outside of the ring. Sure they may place, sure they pass with flying scores, but watch some of those dogs outside of the ring. Ring training is really fun, I love it but I'm much more impressed when my dogs pass a real life test like aggressive dogs running into our yard with a seamless recall regardless, or a sit stay "out of sight" in a public setting, those tests give me so much more respect for my dogs and our bond as a team together. Sure its' nice to get those ribbons, it's a lot of fun, but the pride I feel as I watch an owner on the street struggle to get their dogs to leave mine, or a hot dog bun on the ground? Much more then the blue ribbon ;)

I know some of those people, lol. E-collar freaks. Dog doesn't sit in half a second, zap. Dog looks at another dog, zap. I don't know if I would say they were near death, although I know some dogs can develop heart issues, but it definitely isn't the way I want to work with my dogs who are pets first, team mates second.

If I were to rid myself of aversives, I'd literally be screwed. That would mean ostracizing my dogs for undesirable behaviours is out of use. Ostracizing is HUGE for undesirable household behaviours here. It doesn't require physical force of any kind, not even verbal correction, but it does make an impact on my dogs and "repels" them from doing that behaviour again.

How do you manage no aversives with JRT's? You do absolutely nothing when they perform unwanted behaviours? Or every absolute situation, including household you train for?

I've honestly never heard of someone not using aversives at all! LOL. I thought everyone did in one way or another, whether it be ignoring a dog, verbal corrections, I suppose even direct eye contact for some dogs (including one of mine) could be considered an aversive as he will most definitely change his behaviour with an "evil eye stare". LOL.

bendyfoot
November 14th, 2008, 08:25 AM
This heel was taught with no corrections....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T-WUt6k-ac

Its a much better heel than the one on her father who I did teach with mild corrections.

I have to say that is one d@mn pretty heel!:D:thumbs up

How do you manage no aversives with JRT's? You do absolutely nothing when they perform unwanted behaviours? Or every absolute situation, including household you train for?

I've honestly never heard of someone not using aversives at all! LOL. I thought everyone did in one way or another, whether it be ignoring a dog, verbal corrections, I suppose even direct eye contact for some dogs (including one of mine) could be considered an aversive as he will most definitely change his behaviour with an "evil eye stare". LOL.

I'm curious to hear the answer to this question too...because I would put "moving the dog back into position with my hands" or "making an "Ah-ah!" noise" etc. into the "adversives" category as well, if by "adversive" you mean "negative".

We used a prong collar, with great success, when initially working with our oldest to deal with serious dog aggression (what CM would call a "red zone case". Now, we use her regular flat nylong collar and a verbal distraction or a tap on the back is enough to "snap her out of it" when/if she starts to fixate on a strange dog and get her attention back on me/look to me for leadership. I would condider all these techniques adversives, granted on different scales. She gets ample praise for attending to me and keeping the leash loose when in these situations, which I know are still challenging for her.

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 08:42 AM
No I was thinking of the people who 'hang' their dogs by the choke AKA some of the Kohler stuff.

Now as to how there are basically no aversives... If a situation breaks out (aka dog fight) then we are into management and not training. In those situations just about anything goes to stop the situation.

As for training. Ok an example.

Kaiden would lag when heeling. I had been doing classes for ever I thought he should know heel by now. Heck at times he was heeling well. So I gave little leash pops. And still he would lag.

As an experiment I stopped correcting and just ignored the lagging and c/t when he was in heel. That fixed it.

Another example was that Kaiden would anticipate the down in the out of sight sit stays (for open obedience) I tried all sorts of things. Even tried an e collar. (he screamed on 2.. and shook.. never again) I tried having people gently correct him by putting him back in a sit (in case me coming back to put him in a sit was rewarding) Nada... no improvement.

So I dropped the corrections and when back to the clicker. He has never gone down in the sit in a match or trial since.

99.9% of the time if the dog is failing its the trainers fault. Either the dog doesn't understand fully, is confused due to conflicting signals, or simply lacks proofing and sufficient reward history... I think it is mean to then correct using aversives.

If your dog is ignoring you and you correct him/her using aversives. If the dog truly understands the job then you should not have to correct again for that issue for a very long time. If you are correcting often (say once a training session or once every few) then IMO your dog is not understanding the exercise and you should not be correcting.

I have a dog who has an amazing stay in obedience. But we have issues at times with our stay in agility. Self control is an ongoing battle. I do correct her. I put her away. I remove what she wants. I don't yell, yank on her leash etc. (actually yelling means nothing to her.. I can scream bad dog and she wiggles and comes running lol)

Lets say I have a foster dog who has a bite history. The dog has learned that when its uncomfortable with the situation it can bite and that backs the person off. I don't want the dog MORE uncomfortable with the situation. So lets say the dog is food possessive. I show the dog in small steps that letting humans take food from you is a good thing. If I was to use force and intimidation I could likely get the dog to let me have the items. BUT JRTs escalate to aggression and pain (its bred into them.. you are in a hole facing a fox/coon/badger its likely going to be fighting back. A dog who runs from aggression/pain will never make a good hunter) So the moment someone who is not intimidating enough comes along the dog will bite. I want the dog to respect all humans.. not just the big and scary ones.

Oh and as for scores. I have yet to have a perfect score in obed. And there has never been a perfect score handed out at any obed trials I have been too.

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 08:48 AM
I have to say that is one d@mn pretty heel!:D:thumbs up




Thanks! LOL I put that on youtube specifically for another forum as I was tired of people claiming they could teach a fantastic heel and my methods wouldn't :)

IMO my most impressive trick is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjCgiUWLTa8
If your horse won't lie down its not like you can push them down! Velvet will be in an upcoming TV show where they needed a horse to die on command (hence the cue is a pointing whip.. no verbals allowed) AND horses are prey animals they don't like being vulnerable in new/busy places. It takes a lot of trust to have a horse lie down from a distant cue on a busy set.

bendyfoot
November 14th, 2008, 09:26 AM
No I was thinking of the people who 'hang' their dogs by the choke AKA some of the Kohler stuff.

That's horrendous. And certainly not the proper way to use a collar.

Now as to how there are basically no aversives... If a situation breaks out (aka dog fight) then we are into management and not training. In those situations just about anything goes to stop the situation.

Ok, so it seems like you're making a distinction between training (i.e. teaching a specific behaviour/task/outcome that you want your dog to perform reliably on command) and behaviour management (i.e. stopping unwanted behaviours that the dog is self-initiating)

As for training. Ok an example.

Kaiden would lag when heeling. I had been doing classes for ever I thought he should know heel by now. Heck at times he was heeling well. So I gave little leash pops. And still he would lag.

As an experiment I stopped correcting and just ignored the lagging and c/t when he was in heel. That fixed it.

Another example was that Kaiden would anticipate the down in the out of sight sit stays (for open obedience) I tried all sorts of things. Even tried an e collar. (he screamed on 2.. and shook.. never again) I tried having people gently correct him by putting him back in a sit (in case me coming back to put him in a sit was rewarding) Nada... no improvement.

So I dropped the corrections and when back to the clicker. He has never gone down in the sit in a match or trial since.

This makes sense to me and I have no argument whatsoever. Our dogs, when doing obedience, work for praise and occasionally treats (especially when they're younger) and I have no problem with using either to polish up a particular command.

99.9% of the time if the dog is failing its the trainers fault. Either the dog doesn't understand fully, is confused due to conflicting signals, or simply lacks proofing and sufficient reward history... I think it is mean to then correct using aversives.

I agree with this as well. I know that my dogs will falter a bit/be sloppy with obedience work if my own signals (body/hand/voice) are not crystal clear. I cannot expect them to perform up to par if my own performance is lacking.

If your dog is ignoring you and you correct him/her using aversives. If the dog truly understands the job then you should not have to correct again for that issue for a very long time. If you are correcting often (say once a training session or once every few) then IMO your dog is not understanding the exercise and you should not be correcting.

Ok, fair enough. So how do you get to the point where task is completed properly? It seems like you're using mainly clicker training to acheive this?

I have a dog who has an amazing stay in obedience. But we have issues at times with our stay in agility. Self control is an ongoing battle. I do correct her. I put her away. I remove what she wants. I don't yell, yank on her leash etc. (actually yelling means nothing to her.. I can scream bad dog and she wiggles and comes running lol)

Yeah, our GSD gets all wiggly and waggy and silly, no matter what tone of voice you're using, even since she was a pup there was never any point in raising your voice to her...

Lets say I have a foster dog who has a bite history. The dog has learned that when its uncomfortable with the situation it can bite and that backs the person off. I don't want the dog MORE uncomfortable with the situation. So lets say the dog is food possessive. I show the dog in small steps that letting humans take food from you is a good thing.

Are you rewarding, then, for desireable behaviours (ie treating/praise?) I would agree to this too. That said, if a dog were to snap at me or anyone else over food I would likely be inclined to correct and not ignore that behaviour. Some things (biting/snapping) are simply inexcusable in my books and I want to make that very clear from the get-go. Ample praise for good, ignore mild infractions if they are not hurting anyone, correct for dangerous behaviour...that's pretty much my scale



I guess I'm pretty much in agreement with everything you've said here, and your approaches to training. I personally don't feel uncomfortable or that I'm coming across as threatening to a dog if I give its back a tap or its leash a little tug to get its attention focused back to the task I've given it to do.

My question would be, though, if you're dealing with an aggressive, reactive dog, how do you manage that with only +ve R? Scenario...you're walking a reactive dog, and it sees another dog across the street. It is completely focused on the other dog (and therefore posturing already) and is not "hearing" verbal commands to "watch"/"sit" etc. What do you do? You've said that you're in management mode for dog fights...what do you do to prevent them in an aggressive dog?

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 10:56 AM
I would never yell or correct a dog who bites. Dogs aggress out of fear. Increase the fear and you make the problem bigger. You may suppress the behaviour for a while but you are not fixing the over all problem. For example if you manage to scare the dog into not snapping/biting. What happens when the dog then has a child to deal with. The dog knows its bigger/stronger than the child.

On the other hand I would address the real issue and fix that. Then you don't have to worry about the biting.

Long story condensed... Had a foster pup. Animal control picked him up and deemed him aggressive. Joey was a 6 month old JRT. As he was deemed aggressive the JRTRO sent him to me. He was in no way aggressive. He was a very happy drivey JRT. You could take food/toys from him. He had no quarding issues, he loved strangers, you could come up behind him and scoop him up. He was a delightful pup. He got adopted by a family that was incrediabley unsuitable. They go for training but (as I know the person they went too) they didn't follow directions, the argued etc etc. I get him back 2 year later. Now Joey has bitten badly, numerous times. He was so aggressive the daughter couldn't even go in her room if he was on her bed. He was extremely reactive to strangers.

First off his issues were created by stupid people. Second of all I don't want this dog thinking the only reason he shouldn't bite is if the people are too scary to take on.

So he entered boot camp. He had to live in a crate for a while and work for every thing he got. He had to down stay in his crate for his morning meal, he had to come, down, off, sit, stay for the remainder of his meals. The rest of my family ignored him.

Now this did a few things. By being in a crate he couldn't practice guarding furniture and be reinforced for aggressive behaviour. By having to work for all things he learned that I owned everything-not him. I taught him that people taking stuff away from you is a great thing. (start off with a very low value toy take it away and either give a better one, or return it with a smear of cheese or peanut butter.. gradually increase the value of the toys until he is excited to have you take the item)

Once he was good I had my child hand feed him some food for sits, downs etc etc. (My son was 7. He is very dog savvy. He was the child handler of the year for the JRTCC and competes in AAC agility and dockdogs.)

Then I had friends from school come over (went back to school) I told them to ignore him, not even make eye contact. I gave them a hand full of high value treats. Then I let him out of his crate. He barked and acted all spooked with his hackles up. But as no one made any threatening jestures (the previous owners had taught him, by correcting him with leash pops and yelling any time he barked at people, that strangers meant bad things.. we need to reverse it) As soon as he settled down I had them dribble the fun treats.

It took a few sessions and soon he was quite happy to have strangers show up in the house.

I then took him to a JRT trial. Just to hang out. I took him around other people. He growled and snapped at someone. MY fault. I had pushed him too soon. (we live on a farm so its hard to meet people walking in public) He had learned that strangers in our home were just fine, but still didn't like strangers outside the home) I simply removed him from the area and we walked where it wasn't so crowded and he did fine. If I had corrected him, it only would have reinforced that people are nasty and made the problem worse.

I didn't have the time to work with him in public places (school, farm, family) but he was now to the point where he could go to another foster home. They have kept working with him (they live in a city) and he is doing great! They have decided to adopt him (yay for happy endings)

I have many more stories like that one. Joey was the worst has he had done some serious damage to the father of the house on more than one occasion. He was the kind of dog who met aggression with aggression.

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 11:21 AM
I realized there are some who don't understand some termonology (this is common)

Ignoring is not an aversive. You are not adding something the dog dislikes. You are removing something the dog does like (social interaction).

I mainly use R+ which is adding something the dog likes. A treat, a toy, pee on a post (for my stud dog.. very rewarding), a scratch etc. I do use P- at times. That is negative punishment.. which is taking away something the dog likes. So ignoring, time outs etc.

I never use P- which is the idea behind shock training and the ear pinch of the forced retrieve. And other than in very very very rare cases do I use P+ where you add something the dog does not like.

There can be consequences but they are not the kind that are likely to suppress.

bendyfoot
November 14th, 2008, 12:11 PM
I would never yell or correct a dog who bites. Dogs aggress out of fear.

I'm sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree that this is the source of all agression, unless you consider "fear that my status as ruler of the universe might maybe, possibly, be threatened" a true fear. A dog who's afraid of its food being taken away because it was previously starved, or afraid of being hurt by a human or other dog, fine, I agree. You don't want to add fear to a fearful situation, and you want to help the dog relearn that humans/dogs/whatever don't have to be triggers for fear.

I'm talking about a dog who, upon glimpsing another dog, immediately begins to stiffen and posture into what is undeniably a dominant posture. Who, if in proximity to another dog, will attack furiously and without any provocation or challenge whatsoever from the other dog. What would you do with this?


Long story condensed... Had a foster pup. Animal control picked him up and deemed him aggressive. Joey was a 6 month old JRT. As he was deemed aggressive the JRTRO sent him to me. He was in no way aggressive. He was a very happy drivey JRT. You could take food/toys from him. He had no quarding issues, he loved strangers, you could come up behind him and scoop him up. He was a delightful pup. He got adopted by a family that was incrediabley unsuitable. They go for training but (as I know the person they went too) they didn't follow directions, the argued etc etc. I get him back 2 year later. Now Joey has bitten badly, numerous times. He was so aggressive the daughter couldn't even go in her room if he was on her bed. He was extremely reactive to strangers.

This is also a different situation from the one I just described. The one you have here is an obvious result of human ignorance and fault, not true aggression.

First off his issues were created by stupid people. Second of all I don't want this dog thinking the only reason he shouldn't bite is if the people are too scary to take on.

Agreed. Strong, consistent leadership and desensitization was what was needed. (as you described)

We agree on many points here, and maybe what I'm trying to address is a really specific type of situation/behaviour issue, but I'm honestly interested in other solutions that what we're using right now. Not because they're not working, mind you, but because I like to have lots of stuff in my toolbox.

bluestar
November 14th, 2008, 12:58 PM
I guess I'm pretty much in agreement with everything you've said here, and your approaches to training. I personally don't feel uncomfortable or that I'm coming across as threatening to a dog if I give its back a tap or its leash a little tug to get its attention focused back to the task I've given it to do.

My question would be, though, if you're dealing with an aggressive, reactive dog, how do you manage that with only +ve R? Scenario...you're walking a reactive dog, and it sees another dog across the street. It is completely focused on the other dog (and therefore posturing already) and is not "hearing" verbal commands to "watch"/"sit" etc. What do you do? You've said that you're in management mode for dog fights...what do you do to prevent them in an aggressive dog?


I'd be very curious to see how this would be handled. Our beagle has a habit of reacting to a couple of other aggressive dogs whenever he lays eyes on them while on-leash. I've been working with him to avoid other dogs while walking by putting him in a sit and treating until the other dog passes. But there are 2 dogs in the neighbourhood where this has failed totally. When he sees these 2 dogs he will go into a posture and begin to lunge and howl at the other dog. Failing being able to reach them he will bite at whatever is closest, usually bushes or his leash. He has even grabbed my leg once while going for his leash, but immediately let go. Lately, he has even lunged at my other dog when he is in this mode although I make sure he is far enough away not to reach him. Corrections would have no effect on this dog as he completely ignores them once he red-zones.

This dog is generally a very submissive dog. His first reaction to meeting someone is to rollover on his back for a bellyrub. He has no food aggression, can be picked up and held by anyone without an issue, will give up toys and food no problem. He is not reactive to most other dogs. He will ignore any dog that is barking at him out of fear or any dog that is walking by that is ignoring him. He will generally approach another dog for a quick butt-sniff and then find another scent of interest. When off-leash at a park and trouble starts, with the first sign of growling, his reaction is to wander off to find another scent. The only time he reacts to a dog is while on-leash with an aggressive dog that is posturing at him. The dogs he has reacted too we have been told by their owners and other owners in the neighbourhood that those dogs do not get along with other dogs. Right now or only course is working on the ignoring and turning the other way when we see those dogs.

bendyfoot
November 14th, 2008, 01:25 PM
The dog in my description will act aggressively even towards dogs who are NOT acting aggressively or in any way challenging her.

If yours is reacting to only a handful of jerks and is generally fine with 99% of other dogs, I can more or less understand her reaction and I think you're doing the right thing by simply removing her from the situation.

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 01:50 PM
THe dog in that clip.. and the one in my avatar is very dog reactive. She will even aggress to non threatening dogs. She is a work in progress. And yes its all fear. She is fine with dogs she knows well.

She freezes and her posture is all 'dominant'. The issue is my truly alpha male never does that. The alpha dog is like the 'cool' kid in HS. They know they are dabomb and don't go around strutting. Its those that are NOT quite the cool kids that have to act all nasty and strut around. A truly alpha dog (or horse or person...) is not reactive. The are ultra confident and in control. A dominant dog DOES NOT aggress to non threats.

That said Dekka competes in agility, rally, dock dogs, JRT trials and obedience where she must be around other dogs. I do not correct her. That would destroy trust. She is fearful, I teach her that I will protect her. She does not need to protect us. I teach her to focus on me.

BenMax
November 14th, 2008, 01:53 PM
Dekka you are starting to sound like Caeser!:D

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 02:04 PM
Not at all. He believes in the whole 'alpha' thing. I don't.

He suggests people dominate dogs.. I don't.

He teaches people to flood and suppress dogs. I don't (flooding is bad)

He uses techniques that are so dangerous that they have to run disclaimers on screen. I use ones that a 2 year old could use.

Not sure where anything I have said sounds like the stuff the Milan spouts.

BenMax
November 14th, 2008, 02:33 PM
She is fearful, I teach her that I will protect her. She does not need to protect us. I teach her to focus on me.

Here. Don't get offended Dekka.:)

bendyfoot
November 14th, 2008, 02:36 PM
Ok, I really need you to explain HOW you are dealing with your reactive-aggressive dog...

HOW do you manage Dekka around other dogs?

WHAT do you do if she suddenly goes nutso with aggression and tries to attack another dog, unprovoked?

HOW do you teach her not to be fearful?

HOW do you teach her to focus on you?

I like the IDEA of what you're saying, but you're not describing your techniques or methods.

Dekka
November 14th, 2008, 04:22 PM
LOL ok well Cesar may say that but its nothing new.. good trainers have been saying that for ages.

First off I teach a few things at home. I teach a very reliable watch me. Then I go to places where I know other people have great control over their dogs. Advanced obed and agility classes. Agility in particular is great as many people have DR dogs, so are experienced and sympathetic.

I work Dekka as close as she is comforatable. If she begins to tense up I get her to focus and move back a foot.

I NEVER take her to places where there are likely to be off leash dogs. I make sure she NEVER gets attacked again. (I almost lost her as a pup due to her littermates... she still carries the scars) IF there is an off leash dog she is small enough I can pick her up. If she was larger (there would be less risk.. but she is very tiny) I would keep myself between the other dog and myself. I do this with my son's BC. He is nervous on leash and I don't want it to escalate to DR. I ask for him to focus on me and sit.

Dekka now has a 'bubble' around her. On a good day its about a foot and a half, on a bad day its just under 3 feet. If I let down my guard and don't pay attention and a dog gets into her bubble she will react (and sounds down right evil!!) I don't punish her as its my fault. She is scared and upset, she looks to me to protect her-why punish her for my failure?

I do worry about other peoples out of control dogs. I can only do so much to protect her.

She is totally fine with dogs she has met a few times and has fantastic dog speak skills.

Snark speak.. http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/pentax%20pics/dekkapissed.jpg

Being tolerant
http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/nomnose.jpg

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/tolerance1.jpg

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/tolerance2.jpg

Just because she is reactive to strange and therefor 'possibly dangerous' dogs does not mean she can't live with our pack at home or hang with friend's dogs. She is one of the most tolerant JRTs I know of when it comes to other dogs ... as long as she knows them.

K9 Love
November 14th, 2008, 09:07 PM
I didn't get to read any of the other posts yet, but your example with heeling is a great one IMO. And yes, I agree that stringing a dog up is completely unnecessary. My trainer does do this sometimes and I hate seeing it done, she is a koehler (sp?) fan though. She's unfortunately an ear pincher too... Another "famous" trick I hate.

I also used leash pops for heeling with my dogs. Hades didn't require many so I saw little to no effect with him, but Roxy was also a lagger. I would give her pops, and I came to realize that my need for the correction wasn't lessening, which it should if the correction is efficient. Now for fun, and because she loves it, I just use an IB to get her up and excited, it's been working really well for us, except people in the rally ring think I keep saying "sex,sex,sex,sex,sex" as our IB/TB is "x". ROFL! :D

With Roxy specifically, I definitely see what your saying in regards to heeling. I went through it myself and noticed a change almost immediately. I never strung her up, or zapped or anything for heeling, but even those little leash pops can slowly shut a dog down and make them hate heeling.

ETA - I'm slowly working my way through your posts Dekka, lol.

And I have a question. You said all dogs agress out of fear. You saw Roxy with mafia, it's almost as though she WANTS to be patted, but as soon as the patting stops or you reach for the wrong spot, she growls and sometimes snarls, I don't think she snarled that day. I have a hard time labelling it fear if she's the one moving towards the stranger in that exact situation. Does that make any sense? LOL. I've just come to tell myself that regardless of label, I'm leaning towards it just being a learned behaviour for the both of us now, my nerves go, she senses it and people just don't touch her so she isn't used to it.

Do you believe ALL dogs "agress out of fear", or just most?

I use the term "aversive" as taken from Karen Pryor's website, as something an animal is willing to work to avoid. So if a dog jumps up and you ignore it, it no longer jumps up because it doesn't want to be ignored. Everyone understands and views terminologies differently, and that is my understanding of the word "aversive". It does not have to physical and I use it very generally. I think the definition off of Karen Pryor's website is pretty general in itself! LOL.

Dekka
November 15th, 2008, 12:06 AM
I think 99.9% of dogs aggress out of fear. Confident dogs have no need unless there is a clear and present danger.

Do you know Roxy's history? She could be torn between wanting to make a connection and fear. Joey was like that.. he would go up to people, then snap at them. He has progressed nicely, but he had never had a really bad experience. Just the owners yelling and leash popping. It could very well be a learned behaviour chain.

I do believe just as there are unbalanced people there are unbalanced animals. I own a dog that is 'not right in the head'. She has issues that are NOT normal. Her dam was PTS due to similar issues. She goes into a 'state' where she does not recognise any one or anything. Very scary. So in those cases its not nessissarily fear.

(oh and prey drive isn't really the same thing as aggression IMO.. that is a food behaviour some dogs will go after other dogs/cats out of prey drive)

Yes some people refer to anything that a dog works to avoid as aversive (and techinically that is correct) But most people equal aversive with P+ only.

K9 Love
November 15th, 2008, 06:16 PM
A ha, now I see the difference. I say "correction" in regards to P+. Aversive to me is a more "positive" outlook on technically ceasing or correcting behaviours, although of course aversive can be physical, I use it when referring to the more softer ideas of "correction" like ignoring. Correction to me is harsh leash pops, prongs, e-collars etc.

I know Roxy's history from the day I got her at 6 weeks old. Before that, she was confined to a dog house, never saw the inside of a house before I got her. There were children at the house where I got her that I imagine played with the dogs. Not too sure of the amount or "quality" of human contact she had during those super important first weeks of life.

She wasn't socialized nearly enough in her first year of life although this is how we got the strong bond we still have despite my use of harsh aversives/corrections. We spent day in and day out together and very soon on I discovered her overly protective "aggression". We went to obedience classes and only managed those behaviours, my trainer never really wanted to work on her issues with being touched. It was all about management, a calm, polite dog in heel position as you talked to a stranger, or a dog that didn't lunge and snarl at the mere sight of a man approaching too closely. I will say, she has come a LONG way! LOL

Something that Roxy is also notorious for, is allowing you to scratch her chin (She let Lane do this, she never bit him although she did do this..) and as soon as you stop, she grumbles and "grabs" your hand with her mouth. She has excellent bite inhibition, rarely if ever does she bite too hard during play, she just literally grabs your hand. Of course the label that comes naturally to me although I don't like it is "dominance".

So I've come to think that Roxy's issues are mainly genetic, but only worsened by environment and I don't believe she will ever be "normal" in the sense of allowing anyone to pat her. Another thing I forgot to mention, and is very recent is, Roxy was diagnosed with hypothyroidism only a few months ago and is now on medication. After I've done some reading I'm rather angry at my vet for not suggesting the T4 work earlier as one of the symptoms is aggression/depression/laziness. I guess because she's only been this way, my vet didn't think that it could be anything medical.

So perhaps with some more work and time, with her medication she may get better. We've definitely noticed a change in behaviour already, now we just have to combat the fact that it's likely a learned behaviour now.

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 08:07 AM
So, just to clarify/make sure I understand you correctly...

Ok, I really need you to explain HOW you are dealing with your reactive-aggressive dog...

HOW do you manage Dekka around other dogs?

You keep other dogs away from her, other than those she knows, and remove her from situations where other dogs may be in a position to harm her.

WHAT do you do if she suddenly goes nutso with aggression and tries to attack another dog, unprovoked?

You ignore and move her from the situation, it was your fault for letting other dogs get too close.

HOW do you teach her not to be fearful?

You do not allow other dogs to harm her. (But if she can't have dogs in her "bubble", is the fear still not present?)

HOW do you teach her to focus on you?

Verbal command?

I like the IDEA of what you're saying, but you're not describing your techniques or methods.



I work Dekka as close as she is comforatable. If she begins to tense up I get her to focus using what? treats? verbal command? and move back a foot.

I NEVER take her to places where there are likely to be off leash dogs. I make sure she NEVER gets attacked again. (I almost lost her as a pup due to her littermates... she still carries the scars) IF there is an off leash dog she is small enough I can pick her up. If she was larger (there would be less risk.. but she is very tiny) I would keep myself between the other dog and myself. I do this as well, but the undesireable behaviour doesn't stop. I do this with my son's BC. He is nervous on leash and I don't want it to escalate to DR (what's DR?). I ask for him to focus on me and sit.

Dekka now has a 'bubble' around her. On a good day its about a foot and a half, on a bad day its just under 3 feet. If I let down my guard and don't pay attention and a dog gets into her bubble she will react (and sounds down right evil!!) I don't punish her as its my fault. She is scared and upset, she looks to me to protect her-why punish her for my failure? So what you're saying is, you expect her to always be reactive so you don't punish/correct undesireable behaviour because the expectation for her not to react is too high? So you basically are going with an avoidance of the stimulus approach?

I do worry about other peoples out of control dogs. I can only do so much to protect her.

She is totally fine with dogs she has met a few times and has fantastic dog speak skills.

Just because she is reactive to strange and therefor 'possibly dangerous' dogs does not mean she can't live with our pack at home or hang with friend's dogs. She is one of the most tolerant JRTs I know of when it comes to other dogs ... as long as she knows them.

Ours too, for the most part. We've been able to introduce two other dogs to our home since really starting to work with Gracie, with no major incidents. The new puppy is a total royal pain in the butt and Gracie is unbeleivably tolerant and patient. There are some dogs that she "knows" that she is totally fine with. However, these are typically either dogs with more submissive/quiet personalities or dogs that are not interested in engaging with her..


So, if I'm understanding you correctly, you basically are avoiding the negative stimulus (other dogs too close to her) and you do not correct aggressive behaviour because it was your fault for letting other dogs get too close. Is that right? I'm asking, because my expectations of Gracie are different...and I'm wondering if you would think they are reasonable and/or attainable.

BenMax
November 17th, 2008, 08:28 AM
I guess we all approach certain situations differently. I for one never avoid a situation that is uncomfortable or undesireable to any of the dogs that I get. I expose my dogs to everything. I believe in desensitizing a dog through routine and showing and guiding them through situations. This does not mean pulling, tugging and yelling. This is simply going through encouragement and making the experience positive.

I have to tell you - I have had great success thus far. I apply the same on horses.

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 08:50 AM
I know everyone has different methods, and that's why I keep probing Dekka for more information...because I'm open to learning new techniques and am interested to hear when someone is having success with a difficult problem such as dog-dog aggression. I think, though, if my interpretation above accurately reflects Dekka's methods, that I'll have to just respectfully agree to disagree on the overall approach...I'm hoping she has more information or can correct any misinterpretations on my part...

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 10:47 AM
I know everyone has different methods, and that's why I keep probing Dekka for more information...because I'm open to learning new techniques and am interested to hear when someone is having success with a difficult problem such as dog-dog aggression. I think, though, if my interpretation above accurately reflects Dekka's methods, that I'll have to just respectfully agree to disagree on the overall approach...I'm hoping she has more information or can correct any misinterpretations on my part...

You can't make some dogs like dogs. I could shut her down and force her to accept strange dogs in her bubble. BUT that would take some serious punishment and destroy the happy dog I have now.

That is like saying a person who has been raped should be forced to accept strange men coming up and touching them. I don't think yelling and pushing them back is unacceptable.

IMO people should have control over their dogs. Why should anyones dog be less than a foot from mine? If my dog can work and not interfere with anyone else's then there is no issue.

My cue to watch me.. is just that a verbal cue "watch me". You can't be snarling at a dog if you are looking up at me :). DR=dog reactive.

JRTs escalate to aggression, so if I was to punish her sufficently to suppress the manifisation of this behaviour I would risk her getting worse.

I would be curious to know how people would deal with this, with out using trust and respect. If you aren't allowed to acknowledge your dog is very uncomfortable and respect and work with that.. then what do you do? If I was to 'correct her' she would either assume I was scarier than the dog.. so shut her down that way. Or she would associate my 'aggressive' behaviour with the presence of the dog and make her worse (as per the joey scenario)

You can see in the heeling vid there are other dogs around and she doesn't even look at them. She knows I will keep her safe and they are no threat. We compete in dog sports that require dogs to be in very close quarters, but even so dogs are seldom less than a foot from each other.

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 11:17 AM
I want my dog to know that I'm the one in control of the situation, not her. If she's growling and posturing and lunging, then she is taking control of the situation, and I'm letting her do it. Not only then, is she being rewarded by the behaviour itself, but also by my implied approval of the behaviour.

Aggressive behaviour is particularly unacceptable IMO when the "offending" dog has done nothing other than exist and poses no threat whatsoever (either in proximity or in body language). If another dog initiates an attack or aggressive behaviour, I would expect a dog to retaliate or protect itself. It's the unprovoked aggression that should be corrected/stopped/discouraged IMO.

We rarely see it get to that point these days (lunging/growling), but when we first started working on this issue, no measure of removal from a situation (until litteraly out of eyeshot), verbal commands (she knows "watch" perfectly when in an uncharged situation), or distraction with toys/treats/anything were effective in breaking her focus from the other dog, nor her desire to litterally KILL (I'm not exaggerating) the other dog. I'm sorry, but I don't care what her fears might be, if any, that behaviour is completely unacceptable.

With the guidance of a trainer we started doing two things: reestablishing our role as the leaders using consistent and super-frequent obedience training and NILFF training in the home), and using a prong collar to administer a correction the very second her body language indicated her intention to aggress (usually pricked ears/alert eyes, stiff body and gait). (Note that by "administer a correction" I mean using a properly positioned/fitted colar and one, quick pop on the leash). The obedience work helped strenthen our relationship and her understanding of her role as the "follower", and the prong allowed us to stop the aggressive behaviour before it started. This was practiced both in private classes and on our own at home, and it did not take long to see major changes.

The most dramatic change was in her overall demeanour at home. She was still the same intelligent, strong-willed,happy, silly girl with a great sense of humour, but now she was RELAXED. She was no longer staring out windows, guarding doors, pacing up and down stairs to "check on things" or barking at the slightest indication of movement outside. She had let it all go, and we hadn't even been working on those issues directly. She no longer thought she needed to be in charge or responsible to keep things safe and under control...she understood it was the HUMANS' job to do this.

Now, on walks, I allow her to meet other dogs, on-leash (loose of course) if they appear friendly...she is able to do this now, and if she starts thinking about "starting something" a quick tug on the leash (flat nylon collar now) she snaps out of it right away and can continue greeting politely (I can't remember the last time I even needed to do that). On walks, if she sees a dog she "doesn't like" and starts to posture, a quick tap on her back with my finger or my heel on her flank snaps her out of it, she relaxes and looks to me immediately for guidance, slackens the leash completely and walks by calmly, all the while being showered with glowing praise. She trusts me to take care of things. One day two jack russels came flying down a neighbour's lawn onto the road and proceeded to try to attack her. She did nothing to retaliate, and simply hunkered down and waited for me to take care of the situation, which I did. So really, it is about trust. She trusts me to manage potentially "bad" situations, and respects my position of leadership. I trust her to behave appropriately and provide her with opportunities to learn and practice polite behaviour with other dogs.

We've added two dogs to our house, something we never thought possible a few years ago.

BenMax
November 17th, 2008, 11:26 AM
Bendyfoot I am with you on this. (definately not to suck up mind you - but I have always agreed with what you write).

I do not 'let' my dogs dictate to me how they are going to behave. I am not going to 'work around' anything unless I am asking something that this particular dog is NOT capable of doing. The dogs will cope and they will get over whatever their problem is. If that means having the dog longer with me, then I rather keep plugging away then to place a dog that is not yet ready.

I will actually go out of my way to controlled situations in order to correct certain undesireable behaviours. If I can sense a danger due to someone else then I will avoid THAT particular situation (the typical person walking dog on an extended lunge lead and talking on the cell phone syndrome).
I truly believe in desensitizing a dog to uncomfortable situations.

I also always use another well balanced dog to assist me. This always seems to help me with training.

Ok that is my :2cents:....I'll be quiet now.:laughing:

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 11:37 AM
Bendyfoot I am with you on this. (definately not to suck up mind you - but I have always agreed with what you write).

Ahhhh, suck up all you like...my ego always has room for a little more inflation :D

I do not 'let' my dogs dictate to me how they are going to behave. I am not going to 'work around' anything unless I am asking something that this particular dog is NOT capable of doing.

Precisely. Whether physical, or mental, or whatever, some dogs have limitations. I will not force my three-legged dog to jump an obstacle, because she is not physically capable of doing it. I will not punish my 6 month old puppy for making a mess in the house, because she is not physically able to hold it. I would not expect Gracie to leave a loose rodent in the house alone while she's unattended because she's a terrier, and is a dog, and chasing and killing rodents is what many dogs do. I DO however, expect ALL my dogs to behave in a civilized manner around humans and other dogs.

I will actually go out of my way to controlled situations in order to correct certain undesireable behaviours. If I can sense a danger due to someone else then I will avoid THAT particular situation (the typical person walking dog on an extended lunge lead and talking on the cell phone syndrome).
I truly believe in desensitizing a dog to uncomfortable situations.

Again, agreed. We worked with Gracie with our trainer to practice being around other dogs. He would bring in either one of his own pets or a dog he was currently training, and in doing so, "set up" Gracie for a very controlled and safe interaction. It was consistent, with a predictable outcome: if she attacked another dog, she was corrected. The moment she relaxed, she was rewarded with praise and love and play. If she approached another dog calmly and politely, she was rewarded with praise and love and play. Every. Single. Time. It didn't take long for her to realize what the better option was. I should point out, too, that Gracie didn't know how to play with other dogs. It wasn't until we regularly MADE her interact with other dogs in a polite way that she started to learn how to initiate and respond to play. We'd never seen her play bow until we got our new puppy. The more exposure she gets to well-mannered dogs, the more she learns, even if she slips sometime and has to be reminded of the rules.

I also always use another well balanced dog to assist me. This always seems to help me with training.

Definitely. As I said, regular exposure to stable well-mannered dogs seemed to be key. If we had avoided all dogs just to avoid the bad behaviour, well...:shrug: We wouldn't be going on many walks or enjoying our little pack of three right now.

Ok that is my :2cents:....I'll be quiet now.:laughing:

:)//////////

happycats
November 17th, 2008, 12:09 PM
Have you guys seen his newest addition? The blue nose pup? (I don't know his name, he didn't say) HE'S SO CUTE!

OMG he's adorable!!! I think his name is Junior.

Did you see the one with the really aggressive Rotti that was rescued by a girl who worked at a rescue, he was un adoptable due to his aggression.
Cesar took him home to rehabilitate him, and his oldest son was working with him and was making great progress, so then Cesar told his son he could keep him :lovestruck: It was so sweet, people may think he bullies the dogs, but judging by himself and his son, he LOVES that dog!!

He is the same way with his kids, always calm with the kids and wife, and they all seem very happy and well adjusted, like his pack!

BenMax
November 17th, 2008, 12:27 PM
I am certainly not ashamed to say that I am a Caeser fan. I know alot of trainers that are not but I think it's out of jealously. All my dogs since I started working with them 15 years ago respected me and I them. I learnt alot along the way and continue to do so. From every trainer good or 'bad' I have learnt something new on what to do and what NOT to do.

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 12:28 PM
OMG he's adorable!!! I think his name is Junior.

Did you see the one with the really aggressive Rotti that was rescued by a girl who worked at a rescue, he was un adoptable due to his aggression.
Cesar took him home to rehabilitate him, and his oldest son was working with him and was making great progress, so then Cesar told his son he could keep him :lovestruck: It was so sweet, people may think he bullies the dogs, but judging by himself and his son, he LOVES that dog!!

He is the same way with his kids, always calm with the kids and wife, and they all seem very happy and well adjusted, like his pack!

Yeah, Junior's just gorgeous :lovestruck:

I saw that episode with the rottie, I loved how well it ended up for everybody:thumbs up

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 02:00 PM
The most dramatic change was in her overall demeanour at home. She was still the same intelligent, strong-willed,happy, silly girl with a great sense of humour, but now she was RELAXED. She was no longer staring out windows, guarding doors, pacing up and down stairs to "check on things" or barking at the slightest indication of movement outside. She had let it all go, and we hadn't even been working on those issues directly. She no longer thought she needed to be in charge or responsible to keep things safe and under control...she understood it was the HUMANS' job to do this.

See I agree. I control the situation. My dog is very relaxed. She is NOT on alert. She knows I am in control and I will protect her. She does not pace, does not fret.. her confidence in me is what allows us to work with dogs closely.

Can you tell the difference between a calm shut down dog (which you often see on CM show..) or a calm confident dog?

Now for a dog not with her history and breed then yes I would expect her to get to the point of greeting other dogs if she wanted too. But as she was nearly killed at 14 weeks by other dogs and still carries the scars I am not unrealistic.

Just a note. Even some of my friends who are HUGE prong collar promoters (I don't mind them for some dogs.. I wouldn't use them.. but I dislike them less than chokes) say never to use them with reactive dogs. They 'might' work. But even they say you have just as much of a chance that the dog will associate the correction with the other dog-thus raising the anxiety level of the dog. Once again if you are working with an 'easy' breed that is naturally friendly and outgoing its going to more more often than a breed that is not.


To the person who says its jealousy.. what is there to be jealous of? Most trainers who dislike him its because we see what his 'methods' do in the hands of the people who watch him. Its because we hate to see untrained dogs terrorized and litterally foaming at the mouth with stress. There are much simpler... yet less dramatic for TV ways to fix the problem. Most trainers are upset that the show is more about entertaining TV than helping dogs. Just look at the dog fight episode. It is probably his most watched episode (if you count the people who watch on line) And its probably going to fuel lots of people who are 'pro BSL' . Thats NOT good for dogs.. yet he let it happen and stuck it on TV!!! How can people support a 'dog person' who seems to have so little regard for dogs?

BenMax
November 17th, 2008, 02:24 PM
I will use the word again Jealous. My main company are trainers...and even they admit that Caeser has something to offer.

So I will agree to disagree with you. I will review all your posts and see if there is anything there interesting that I can use. Thanks for your vision and sharing of information. All very interesting reading.

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 02:45 PM
hmm yes we will have to disagree. I don't see anything that he has to offer that isn't the same as your local mediocre PetSmart trainer has to offer. And even if he did have some good... I don't see it worth all the harm he does.

I am a trainer, and I am NOT jealous. I don't want a TV show. I don't see him as a trainer, so I don't know what I could possibly be jealous of (other than having a TV show.. but I don't want one) There are lots of other trainers I look up to. But my dogs win often enough in many different dog sports that I am totally content in myself and my dogs (not saying I can't improve-lol we can all improve and should never stop learning)

Most of the people I know that despise him don't want what he has. So once again not sure of what they could be jealous of.

Even some of the e collar trainers who used to like him are starting not promote him so much anymore after that dog fight episode. (considering many of them are still helping to fight BSL in Ont)

BenMax
November 17th, 2008, 02:51 PM
I always keep an open mind Dekka. Personally I didn't know you were a trainer, and I find it unusual that you find what he has to say as useless.

The trainers I know train police dogs - so that is a different method all together. Other trainers help dogs that have aggressive tendancies, and others are the day to day trainer. I have yet to hear anyone bring up that episode that has caused such controversy. Or maybe they are forgiving.

I have to tell you - I have made mistakes and thank DOG no one watched my errors....I would be crucified! WOW! BTW - I would love a TV show!

bendyfoot
November 17th, 2008, 03:07 PM
See I agree. I control the situation. My dog is very relaxed. She is NOT on alert. She knows I am in control and I will protect her. She does not pace, does not fret.. her confidence in me is what allows us to work with dogs closely.

Can you tell the difference between a calm shut down dog (which you often see on CM show..) or a calm confident dog?




So we have both arrived at the same result (the relaxed dog with confidence in her owner) using different techniques...perhaps the ones best suited for those particular dogs?

And yes, I know the difference, I've seen both states in dogs.

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 03:39 PM
So we have both arrived at the same result (the relaxed dog with confidence in her owner) using different techniques...perhaps the ones best suited for those particular dogs?

And yes, I know the difference, I've seen both states in dogs.

Perhaps. Though using suppression often has fall out. Not always. I personally would try the least 'dangerous' methods first. And if they fail then go to the riskier ones. Why start with techniques that risk escalating the problem? Why not show the dog what you want and reward that.. instead of punishing what you don't want?

At least that way if for some reason you had a 1 in a million dog that doesn't learn like most mammals then you could try suppression.

K9 Love
November 17th, 2008, 06:20 PM
Perhaps. Though using suppression often has fall out. Not always. I personally would try the least 'dangerous' methods first. And if they fail then go to the riskier ones. Why start with techniques that risk escalating the problem? Why not show the dog what you want and reward that.. instead of punishing what you don't want?

At least that way if for some reason you had a 1 in a million dog that doesn't learn like most mammals then you could try suppression.

If there's anything on this thread I can agree with wholly, it would be the bolded quote Dekka.

I always introduce new behaviours as positively as absolutely possible as I don't want immediate negative associations with the behaviour UNLESS it's a behaviour I wish to cease like jumping the fence or messing with the cats. Now separately I may do positive sessions, but when it comes to ceasing absolutely unacceptable behaviours I do sometimes go right to correction, whether it be mild or not.

I'll always believe that there does come a time when there is a consequence for blatant uncompliance and regardless of what anyone says, I know when my dogs blatantly ignore me. Whatever the reason, it's unacceptable and that warrants a correction in my book BUT I always try my absolute hardest to go the positive route first. And usually it works quite well, I just choose to add in some correction/aversives when proofing to make sure the behaviour is completely reliable when I need it to be.

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 06:40 PM
K9 have you read Shaping Success? Its a really interesting read (and entertaining)

K9 Love
November 17th, 2008, 07:06 PM
No, I haven't although I have a list of must read dog training books somewhere.. lol

My number one on the list though that I'm hoping for Christmas is Control Unleashed. I've been TOLD, numerous times, (LOL) by people that it's a must read for aggressive/reactive dogs.

I went through a shaping phase well over a year ago, I really enjoyed it as did my dogs. We had a lot of fun. I use it mainly for tricks now, but SATS which is very similar to shaping is what we've been focusing on for the past few months with tricks or transferring it over to obedience, clumsily I must say! ROFL! :)

Who's the author of that book?

Dekka
November 17th, 2008, 07:39 PM
Susan Garrett. Its one of those books that really makes you look at your training (at least it did for me) Now that is one trainer I really look up too. She consistently trains world class dogs and trains people and their dogs to world class levels too. But the book isn't written as a training book really. Its just her story, and her struggles to train a 'really really over the top lacking impulse control BC'.

If I can find it by the weekend (I might have lent it out) I can lend it to you.

K9 Love
November 17th, 2008, 09:33 PM
I looked to order it online. Susan Garett is awesome. I've seen her so many times on Top Dogs with Buzz and some videos here and there on youtube. When I searched for it, I didn't think I'd found the right book as you just said it isn't necessarily a training book rather a "biography" of sorts. I had no idea she even wrote a book!

I imagine you get to see her a lot at agility trials and such. Must be pretty neat to see. What about Guy Blanke, I think his name is, with Unia. Have you met him? Do you agree with his training methods? I don't know too much about him other then he's spectacular to watch in the agility ring. I know someone who met him out west a few months ago and said he was really nice. What training style would you say he uses? He really flows on courses, it's almost like watching a ballet performance! LOL :D

That'd be awesome if you could find that book! :)

Dekka
November 18th, 2008, 07:45 AM
I don't see Susan too much as she tends to trial closer to home. LOL my very first trial though.. Susan, and Kayl and a bunch of other world team members were there. (duh who else would be at a trial on a wed morning.. the pros hahaha) Not that I knew who they were at the time-but some were wearing their worlds shirts.

Brandi with Soshi is at a lot of the same trials as me. (She has ran in worlds with a Shiba.. now there are some training skills for you!) There is some awesome agility being ran in Ontario!! I haven't met Guy but he posts a lot on the Bark list (the AAC agility yahoo list)

Susan Garrett also wrote Ruff Love.. the very controversial book. Its all positive training.. but its very very very harsh. Its so harsh its a taboo subject on the clickersolutions list!! (even though its all positive methods!)

I will look for it....

K9 Love
November 18th, 2008, 01:27 PM
How is it harsh if it's positive training methods?!? You have me REALLY confused! LOL :D I need something more specific to get the wheels in my brain a turnin'! ;)

Must've been intimidating! I bet they're all nice people though. :)

I have to do some extremely last minute prep for the trial this Sunday... I have NO expectations whatsoever! We've had a lot of issues popping up, specifically the forging to get away from the food bowl and now from our running stand we do, some hesitiation with hand movement during heel. *sigh* Ah well, I just have to remind myself it's ALL FOR FUN! :D :D Can't wait to see you again! :)

DoubleRR
November 19th, 2008, 08:47 AM
Only comment I have after reading through this thread is: I do not understand why one would consider either Brad or Caesar as dog trainers and compare them to others. They are trainers of dog owners that have gotten themselves into trouble by not researching dog ownership/responsibility. Considering the amount of money to be made by hangers on in an industry combining pets and TV--their "programs" have gotten ridiculously dramatized and sensationalized. However, at the core, Caesar, at least, doesn't call himself a dog trainer--he does call himself a people trainer..and a dog rehabilitator, and I believe his books reflect that. I certainly would not go to someone like that to be instructed on the best methods to create a great obedience trialer.

bendyfoot
November 19th, 2008, 10:09 AM
That's actually a really important distinction, DRR, thanks for highlighting it.

Managing behaviour (dog or owner) and training are two different things.

happycats
November 19th, 2008, 10:15 AM
That's actually a really important distinction, DRR, thanks for highlighting it.

Managing behaviour (dog or owner) and training are two different things.


How true!

I watched Cesar last night, and it was a dalmation in a fire station, he trained the firemen how to treat the dog, so he wasn't so out of control , but the firemen had another man come in to teach the dog tricks (stop drop and roll for when they take the dog on school visists)
and Cesar was there and just watched.

dogmelissa
November 19th, 2008, 04:43 PM
:sorry: I can't stand Brad Pattison. He uses very old school training techniques and is being investigated by the SPCA for hanging a dog by a choke collar on a tree :eek:



Ummm.... no he's not. Where did you get this load of whooey from? Brad doesn't use choke collars, EVER. He uses martingale collars only. And I have searched everywhere and in everyway I can think of and I can't find any evidence of any such charge, investigation or anything else. Cesar on the other hand...

Also, to everyone who's all bashing Brad because he gets into people's homes and starts changing things that you think are unrelated to the dogs - you're probably right that it seems like many things he does are unrelated to dog's bad behaviour, but Brad is also a Professional (human) Life Coach and he can recognize how all relationships are intertwined. He is able to make people realize that the relationships between the people in the family affect the dog and how it reacts to things around it. He fixes many problems beyond "bad behaviour" in a dog.

Anyhow... I honestly had no idea this topic would spark such a debate, but I'm very happy to see that people are being very civil about it! It's rare for forums to have controversial topics that don't get totally out of control and ends up turning into a flame war.

Thanks to everyone for being so civil!! :)
Melissa

angeldogs
November 19th, 2008, 05:40 PM
Brad doesn't use choke collars.I've seen him throw them prong collars and shock collars in the garbage and when the people went to retieve the collars back he told them if they continued to get them he would help them and reminded them that they went to him for help.

BenMax
November 20th, 2008, 09:49 AM
Did anyone see the episode where Brad had a dog by the scruff of the neck where the dog went on two legs and they were face to face?

His solution was to pack up the dog into his vehicle and drive the dog to the shelter...ummmmm - great solution??? And then brought in another puppy for them when they were ready?

Sorry - the guy is a wad with a capital 'W'. He certainly would not be my life 'coach' - I think he is ridiculous. Sorry.

MommaKat
November 20th, 2008, 02:05 PM
I don't agree with all of Cesars methods but I do find him more open minded than Brad. I respect the fact that Cesar will go into all kinds of situations in order to help dogs and their owners. I really like the episode with the fire department. I LOVED the one where he helped a Woman's prison rehabilitate troubled dogs so they could find a loving home. I also liked when he gave his dog Louis (chinese crest) to a family after helping the Father get over his fear of Dogs.

My problem with Brad's show is it's the same thing every episode. He goes in and "fixes" the family and dog then he goes tra lalalala into the sunset :rolleyes: . You never hear an update about how the family did after he was gone, and in the last 2 seasons (I think 2 anyway) I have never seen an update or "where are they now?" episode. He also says in his opening title "I have worked with Celebrities and people just like you" , I would like to know what Celebrities lol. You never see a Celebrity on the show, and when I have looked at Testimonials for his training classes, I have never seen a celebrity endorse it. I know that does not matter as much, but since he says it I would like to know.

I have also read on other boards that he has gone to rescues/shelters to help work with some of their tough cases, but I have never seen an episode of him doing it. The reason I think that's important is because I would like to see how his techniques work on animals that were abused or came from puppy mills. I personally don't think his methods are always best to make a dog trust people again.

I do believe that Brad also cares about Dogs, I think that's probably why he has a "tough love" approach to people. I saw an episode where he came down really hard on a family that was over feeding their beagle and giving him harmful foods like Chocolate. I think he was justified how he handled that . I'm just not sold on the fact that he has to act like that all the time.

For entertainment Value (between the two), and the advice that seems to help most viewers I pick Cesar. To each their own though.

My :2cents: :D

BenMax
November 20th, 2008, 02:22 PM
MommaKat - if the 'Wad' ever pulled his ridiculous attitude on me I swear to DOG it would make for one heck of a show.

Infact I am so distracted by his way that I have no idea what the original behavioural problem was with the dog in the first place.

Oh and his celebrities were the Family Guy and the Simpsons I think...

pawbaby
December 15th, 2008, 04:10 PM
:sorry: I can't stand Brad Pattison. He uses very old school training techniques and is being investigated by the SPCA for hanging a dog by a choke collar on a tree :eek:

I enjoy watching Cesar and I think he is a very good handler with the dogs. But when it comes to tv shows (both Brad & Cesar) there is alot of editing going on and the scenes that you don't see behind the cameras. I also don't agree with some of the tools Cesar uses (prong & shock collars, electric fences) but that just me.

:rolleyes:

I definitely prefer Cesar Milan of the Dog Whisperer at least he explains and shows exactly how he trains his dog in a step by step method. I recently attended a Seminar in Edmonton with Brad Pattison and I have written a complaint to the National Geographic channel about sponsoring his show. I would appreciate if all of you who do not like him would do the same. If he doesn't have his sponsors then he will be taken off the air...this was my letter to the National Geograhic and my experience last Saturday with what happened at that Seminar.

To whom it may concern:

I just want to voice my opinion on Brad Pattison (At The End of My Leash) whose show you televise on your TV station. I had been watching the show and thought I would attend a recent Seminar here in Edmonton which I did on December 13, 2008. I wanted to learn more about his training methods because he explains very little about how he actually trains the dogs on the show. Unlike Cesar Milan (The Dog Whisperer) who shows everything to do with his training methods in a step by step progression which makes sense.

I am appauled that you would sponsor someone like Brad Pattison after attending this Seminar. I mean do you not consider yourself animal activists and strive for humane care and treatment of all animals and yet you televise and promote Brad's show. Are you aware of how cruel and unhumane his methods are? I imagine that he edits out all of the parts where he is unduly cruel to the dogs and this is why it doesn't make sense on his show how the dog was actually trained. What I saw appauled me to say the least. He hung several dogs up in the air for a time with a choker collar, he slapped them across the snout very hard and even though the dog followed through on the action he did not reward him right away because in his words the dog hadn't performed enough to live up to Brad's expecations. He cut most of the owners dog's leashes and harnesses in half and through them away so these people would have to buy his leashes and collars. He was so arrogant through the entire show. He did not show or teach any of the owners how to train their dog but just grandstanded on how he could make them behave through his cruel methods and physical abuse.

I have a little 3 pound 10 ounce Yorkshire terrier. When I spoke to Brad on the phone prior to the Seminar I voiced concern whether all the dogs were large and he said there was nothing to worry about they were all sizes. 90 percent of the dogs were vicious and huge. They were growling and barking fiercly when Brad was beating them and manhandling them. My Mica got scared and was trying to protect me so she barked. Brad came and grabbed Mica by her harness and literally hung her up in air way above his head and the neck part of her harness was choking her little neck. He put her up his jacket and ridiculed her and pulled her bow off her head. Then he had her in the middle of the ring and she was too afraid to walk so he dragged her around like a mop in front of everyone. Then a big Belgian Sheppard who got loose from his master ran at her and Brad only stopped this dog at the last minute from attacking Mica even thought the owners yelled at Brad "No, no he'll kill her". I have never been so nervous through this entire seminar. He refused to let me hold Mica and she was scared, shaking, and cold lying on the concrete floor. I just can't believe that you support and sponsor someone who is so cruel to animals as Brad Patteson showed during the course of this seminar. After this happened Mica started to cough and choke the rest of the day and ultimately I had to rush her to the emergency Vet on call late that night because she was vomiting and it ended up that by hanging her by her harness for that length of time he had chokend her and injured her little throat and it was all inflammed. Mica required an injection of a narcotic to get her to stop choking and coughing, Prednisone to reduce the inflammation, and 7 days of antibiotics to prevent a secondary infection from occurring.

I would appreciate if someone from National Geographic could please comment on this for me. Basically I feel he is a quack, very arrogant, and his only training methods have to do with being abusive to all dogs to the point that they behave with him strictly due to fear. How can you sponsor him when his methods are basically cruel. He put my dog in severe danger at the Seminar and caused her to become sick. I mean I was initially very excited about the seminar with the expecation that I would learn some useful information to help with my training of Mica. However, sadly this wasn't the case at all because basically all he showed the owners was how to beat the dogs down with cruelty by yanking and choking their necks and suspending them up in the air to get them to behave. I'm totally angry and disgusted with his methods and to you, National Geographic, for even sponsoring him without actually looking into how he treats the dogs that he supposedly trains. He taped this Seminar but you can be sure he will edit it to make it appear that he is a wonderful trainer. I would appreciate a response or I will advise all of the people I know to cancel their subscriptions to National Geograhic because if something isn't done to cancel his sponsorship then you are just as bad as he is for advocating cruelty to animals.

MommaKat
December 15th, 2008, 08:12 PM
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. I always find it weird when I see (on his show) him get all uppity about top knots on small breeds. It's very common to see top knots on yorkies,maltese and Shi tzus (especially for show coats) :shrug: . I disagree that it means the owner is humanizing the dog. I also saw an episode where he got all huffy about a dog sweater, I don't like dogs wearing tutus or dresses (nope not my thing :sorry:) but a little sweater because of cold weather is not a big deal.

However, as much as I am not a Brad fan I think the email should go to him. You need to tell him that you were not impressed with his training methods, that you will not recommend him to your friends and you will find a class that best suits the needs of you and your dog. I think he deserves to know how a Client felt about his methods.

Also, in the future (regardless if someone has their own show or not) I think it's best to ask a trainer to sit in on one of their classes (just you) before you put the money down. If they say No, then keep looking .

:2cents::2cents:

Good luck to you and Mica

Rottielover
December 15th, 2008, 08:51 PM
One thing I agree greatly on about Ceasar is ...Exercise, Discipline, affection in that order.
What I have seen too many times with my friends is that they put human emotions unto dogs, which should not be the case.
Dogs are dogs and not human babies.
Dogs will always have instincts, that is nature. But we can work with them to curb some behaviors.

TeriM
December 15th, 2008, 11:44 PM
I thought that the Brad Pattison show is produced by the Slice network not Nationakl Geographic :confused:.

I also thought he hated choke collars and wouldn't let anyone use them :confused:.

I have to say that if I was ever that uncomfortable in a session with my dog I would have just left. I am not really a Brad fan but I find this all a bit strange.

catlover2
December 16th, 2008, 09:29 AM
pawbaby, I think the way he treated your little Yorkie was horrific. :mad: I haven't seen his show, but those cruel training methods can backfire. He should be sued for the harm he did to "Mica" physically, and now perhaps mentally with men? You certainly have lots of witnesses, and vet expenses and a report to back it up. Check it out with a lawyer.

cell
December 16th, 2008, 02:54 PM
I only watched "at the end of my leash" once it was about a man, wife and their kid, and the wife stayed home with the baby and the dog would constantly bark all day and follow her and bark and then the man would come home and coddle the dog. Brad came in and started SCREAMING at everyone, which is not a very good way to make people want to listen to you, coming across like a loonie. The he had the couple do some dumb bonding exercises (they could have called a family psychologist or something for marital counseling). Then he instructed the husband not to touch the dog for the next to week and to correct the dog when it is bad with a collar jerk and he had to "mean it" when he did it, as a example he popped the dog who was sitting calmly at his side so hard it almost toppled over, the family looked appalled, and if they weren't, I was. The dog learned nothing from that correction because it WASN'T DOING ANYTHING.
I like that Cesar always comes across as calm, he uses whatever tools the family is comfortable using whether it is choke or prong, but that is their choice not his, he makes suggestion when the tool doesn't work but otherwise you can tell people all the reasons why or why not to use a tool but they will make up their mind in the end.

Stacey0202
January 14th, 2009, 07:38 PM
Hello everyone,

I was wondering has anyone seen the new show, that aired on Dec.16/08 ? If so do you think he has changed? Yes i'm talking about Brad Pattison.

Colubridz
January 16th, 2009, 03:12 PM
Oh wow Roxy's mom and Dekka are on here I had no idea! I was at that trial too with Duke.

I am so sorry to hear about your experince pawbaby but im glad someone was there with an open mind to report what went on honestly.

I cant stand BP he's rude, arrogant and has no training ability IMO. Worst he runs a training school to "certify" trainers- that makes me shudder.

CM is not in the same boat I know he genuinely loves the dogs he is working with, and has done alot for improving the positive imagine of Am pitbull terriers etc. However that is as far as my positive things to say about CM goes. Like Dekka said, he shuts dogs down, puts them into learned helplessness and calls them rehabiliated.

Stacey0202
January 17th, 2009, 11:29 AM
LOL ok well Cesar may say that but its nothing new.. good trainers have been saying that for ages.

First off I teach a few things at home. I teach a very reliable watch me. Then I go to places where I know other people have great control over their dogs. Advanced obed and agility classes. Agility in particular is great as many people have DR dogs, so are experienced and sympathetic.

I work Dekka as close as she is comforatable. If she begins to tense up I get her to focus and move back a foot.

I NEVER take her to places where there are likely to be off leash dogs. I make sure she NEVER gets attacked again. (I almost lost her as a pup due to her littermates... she still carries the scars) IF there is an off leash dog she is small enough I can pick her up. If she was larger (there would be less risk.. but she is very tiny) I would keep myself between the other dog and myself. I do this with my son's BC. He is nervous on leash and I don't want it to escalate to DR. I ask for him to focus on me and sit.

Dekka now has a 'bubble' around her. On a good day its about a foot and a half, on a bad day its just under 3 feet. If I let down my guard and don't pay attention and a dog gets into her bubble she will react (and sounds down right evil!!) I don't punish her as its my fault. She is scared and upset, she looks to me to protect her-why punish her for my failure?

I do worry about other peoples out of control dogs. I can only do so much to protect her.

She is totally fine with dogs she has met a few times and has fantastic dog speak skills.

Snark speak.. http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/pentax%20pics/dekkapissed.jpg

Being tolerant
http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/nomnose.jpg

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/tolerance1.jpg

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd125/Grey-Run/tolerance2.jpg

Just because she is reactive to strange and therefor 'possibly dangerous' dogs does not mean she can't live with our pack at home or hang with friend's dogs. She is one of the most tolerant JRTs I know of when it comes to other dogs ... as long as she knows them.
I like Jack Russell's myself as i own two of them,and i understand your point of them being small and you can pick them up if you had too,where as a big dog you can't.

Stacey0202
January 17th, 2009, 03:22 PM
Oh wow Roxy's mom and Dekka are on here I had no idea! I was at that trial too with Duke.

I am so sorry to hear about your experince pawbaby but im glad someone was there with an open mind to report what went on honestly.

I cant stand BP he's rude, arrogant and has no training ability IMO. Worst he runs a training school to "certify" trainers- that makes me shudder.

CM is not in the same boat I know he genuinely loves the dogs he is working with, and has done alot for improving the positive imagine of Am pitbull terriers etc. However that is as far as my positive things to say about CM goes. Like Dekka said, he shuts dogs down, puts them into learned helplessness and calls them rehabiliated.
I agree that BP is rude to the people who are asking him for help on some issuses that they are having, but i don't see it in any of his shows about addressing the issuse he just on about other things instead of addressing what is really going on. And as for smacking a dog on the nose anyone in their right mind knows that can cause damage to the dog later on down the road if done over and over again. I don't know what goes on with the filming, but there has been people who have been on his show and are not happy one bit. Has anyone here ever been on his show ?:dog:

Emma.baby
January 26th, 2009, 02:51 PM
:pawprint:Personally i believe Brad is much better than Ceasar. I do not like Ceasar's techniques with the choke collars, pinch collars, electric fences etc.. I went to a Brad Pattison seminar recently and he is not fake i saw for myself and i was the youngest person there so i was the demo person alot. He taught me alot, i did not have to pull on the chain hard to get the dogs i was demoing with to understand. You go to any trainer and you will see they yank so hard. Brad uses friendly collars whereas Ceasar uses pinch collars, prong collars etc. And i do not agree with choking or pinching a dog to get them to listen, they are only listening out of fear! Brad is very upfront and may come off rude to people but he is just telling the truth you can't have a dog walk all over you. He can seem very rude but Brad knows that if you are all mushy about the truth people wont take anything as seriously.

And whoever thinks that Brad uses choke chains you have extremly faulty information he uses the HustleUp collars(martingale) only he throws out any other collars because they are not effective. Ceasar is the one who uses the choke chains, pinch collars, prong collars, shock collars etc.
:thumbs up
GO BRAD!

:dog:

Promethean
January 30th, 2009, 07:55 AM
Brad Pattison is an abusive ignorant person who knows next to nothing about dogs. In an interview I heard him complain about the "fancy" term of reinforcement. He uses body as a weapon to move dogs out of the way, instead of teaching them. He jerks the sh** out of dogs as seen in a youtube series and he perpetually believes that all dogs are trying to usurp humans.

He is a hucksters, selling his products as the panacea to all of your dogs problems, his use of choke collars (and yes, half choke collars are still choke collars) borders on abuse. He punishes the dogs without ever teaching them what they should be doing. It's like watching a lion tamer from the 18th C, except without the whip.

His diploma mill "school" is possibly the worst of all and show how greedy his is, only into the money. There are plenty of stories in his forum about people with no experience in owning - much less training - dogs who take his lame course to start their own brute force approach just like him.

Millan is not much better, he too relies on punishment to drive the dog into "calm submissiveness" - the rest of us who studied pysc call it LEARNED HELPLESSNESS.

Dekka
January 30th, 2009, 08:47 PM
I was watching some BP vids on youtube. Umm you don't have to use a choke to be abusive. And I know some very none abusive people who use prongs. (acutually most of the top obed people in Canada use prongs and clickers together. Ricki Abrams and Marie Sawford come to mind)

Its not the materials so much.. its how you use them. I watched BP abuse dogs. He hit them in the face for looking around, he clothes lined them around trees... no reason to do such things.

CM for all that I dislike what he does.. I do think he does love dogs, I never get that impression with BP. He never looks like he likes the dog he is working with.

cell
January 30th, 2009, 09:59 PM
gee wiz, I watched about 2 mins total from his youtube street safety seminar and I watched him clothesline a husky about 5 times in 1 minute, by running next to a tree then jumping to the other side so when the dog had 2 options, strangle itself on the other side, or crash into the tree trying to get to the other side. Then I switched to another clip and watched him march around with a pit mix that we was waiting for it to step in front of him so he could pop it hard enough to whip it around. then he cracked it in the face for looking around. How does this guy have his own show? how does he have any credibility? I don't think I ever heard him give anyone any guidance just walking around trying to get a perceived good result to stroke his ego. Even in general interviews he seems shady and psychotic... I watched a bit more and watched him smack another dog in the face and put his hand up in someones face and scream at them saying they were annoying him, I literally feel uncomfortable watching this guy. I don't understand how someone did not get up in his face for cracking a dog on the nose as hard as he did, people call the cops on that type of thing if they see it happen in the park.. seriously

Promethean
February 13th, 2009, 04:52 PM
I saw that video a couple of days ago. I was appalled that nobody complained and we actually heard someone laugh as the dog was hanged around a tree. This jerk abruptly changed direction just so he could show the dog who's boss.

I too watched that video, and I wonder what exactly was the dog supposed to LEAVE, when it was looking directly at Pattison. There was absolutely no reason to hit him in the face like that. The leash jerks that preceded this hit were also unfair.

Finally there is a third video in which he is holding a woman's dog, calls her annoying for asking questions and the proceeds to yank, hang and hit her dog in the face for no reason.

I've written to Slice and some of the shows sponsors to complain about this abusive jerk. Maybe if the sponsors pull out, his show will be cancelled.

Luvmypitgirls
February 14th, 2009, 06:45 PM
Ok, this is my strictly my opinion, hope it doesn't offend anyone...but here it is....I think Brad is a complete idiot!
I have tried to watch his show, but have never gotten more than 15 minutes into any one episode.
Number one, I have heard that he is being investigated as well, for an act of animal cruelty, if it is proven true, I hope he loses his show.
Number two, he is so very condescending to those he is supposedly trying to help. He comes off like a bully most of the time.
Number three, I seen an episode where he deliberately opened a gate and let two dogs run loose down the street because he was was frustrated with the owners. What if they had been hit by a car? The show ended with Brad and the owners chasing them thru a field.
Number 4, kinda tunes in with #2, I don't see any reason for public humiliation, which he commits in almost every episode.

I wouldn't let this man anywhere near my dogs:frustrated:

I do watch Dog Whisperer, I don't always agree with him on certain issues, but for the most part I respect him. I have applied a lot of his methods with my Pits and Rotts, and it works for me. I also like the fact that he doesn't demean the owners he's trying to help.

I have asked a few ppl I know, fellow dog owners if they have watched Brad's show, and more often than not, I get the same reply..."I tried, but he ain't no Dog Whisperer."

Btw, if I want marriage counselling I'll go to a marriage counsellor, Brad seems to think he's both a marriage counsellor and dog trainer, personally I think he's neither.

MyBirdIsEvil
February 22nd, 2009, 12:55 PM
Oh my god! I ran accross this thread while searching for something else and I've never even heard of this Brad Pattison guy but after looking him up on Youtube I have to believe he's just plain sadistic! He appears to loathe dogs (not to mention people) and I can't for the life of me figure out why he is working with them.

If I saw someone using some of those tactics on their dog at the park I would be calling the police to report animal abuse!

I would have to say I'd definately pick Cesar Millan over this guy. I don't agree with all his methods but he at least appears to enjoy working with dogs and wants the best for them and has some good tips on dog ownership. He doesn't abuse animals simply for the sake of abusing them. (Though I haven't seen this dog fight episode that everyone is talking about and can't seem to find it.)

Wow, just wow. That's all I have to say. And who would pay this guy to abuse them and their animals? It boggles the mind.
Oh and just because he uses a martingale collar it's not choking? You can choke a dog just as well with that type of collar, especially if it's poorly fitted, so think about that.

mona_b
February 24th, 2009, 09:25 PM
I'm sorry, but I have watched Cesar and I am so disgusted..If I was walking down the street and saw the things he was doing, I would personally CLOCK him...:evil:

One episode a dog was wearing a prong. The dog was in a sit position, he literally lifted this dog(75lbs) off his front paws and the dog was gasping...With another dog he did the same thing..But this dog was fighting it..So this made matters worse..The dog was snorting and choking...With another dog he kept kicking it to get it's attention..He was kicking it from behind...Another dog he kept jabbing it with his hand.Another dog comes out of a room when he's not supposed he gets up and goes and smacks the dog...So with all this,what kind of training is this?????..If anything you are putting fear in a dog doing this. And to me this is abuse..I know quite a few trainer and have seen their work, and not once have i EVER seen training like this.

My niece has 2- 5 1/2 month old pups..She was having issues with the pulling.And she takes both out at once.I took one pup out at a time..Nikkita is the worse..Within 15 mins I had her at my side walking..I then took Hunter out..Same thing..Then I took both out..15 mins again and I had them both walking one on each side of me...I never layed a hand(or foot) on them to get my attention..Never yanked at them either. It's all in the commands..Something I have yet to hear Cesar use. He would rather be physical then vocal.

My pick would be Dr Stanley Coren...:D

DoubleRR
February 25th, 2009, 08:58 AM
I'm sorry, but I have watched Cesar and I am so disgusted..If I was walking down the street and saw the things he was doing, I would personally CLOCK him...:evil:

One episode a dog was wearing a prong. The dog was in a sit position, he literally lifted this dog(75lbs) off his front paws and the dog was gasping...With another dog he did the same thing..But this dog was fighting it..So this made matters worse..The dog was snorting and choking...With another dog he kept kicking it to get it's attention..He was kicking it from behind...Another dog he kept jabbing it with his hand.Another dog comes out of a room when he's not supposed he gets up and goes and smacks the dog...So with all this,what kind of training is this?????..If anything you are putting fear in a dog doing this. And to me this is abuse..I know quite a few trainer and have seen their work, and not once have i EVER seen training like this.

My niece has 2- 5 1/2 month old pups..She was having issues with the pulling.And she takes both out at once.I took one pup out at a time..Nikkita is the worse..Within 15 mins I had her at my side walking..I then took Hunter out..Same thing..Then I took both out..15 mins again and I had them both walking one on each side of me...I never layed a hand(or foot) on them to get my attention..Never yanked at them either. It's all in the commands..Something I have yet to hear Cesar use. He would rather be physical then vocal.

My pick would be Dr Stanley Coren...:D

Again, I do not believe Cesar considers himself a dog trainer.

Quoting myself:

Only comment I have after reading through this thread is: I do not understand why one would consider either Brad or Caesar as dog trainers and compare them to others. They are trainers of dog owners that have gotten themselves into trouble by not researching dog ownership/responsibility. Considering the amount of money to be made by hangers on in an industry combining pets and TV--their "programs" have gotten ridiculously dramatized and sensationalized. However, at the core, Caesar, at least, doesn't call himself a dog trainer--he does call himself a people trainer..and a dog rehabilitator, and I believe his books reflect that. I certainly would not go to someone like that to be instructed on the best methods to create a great obedience trialer.

Bailey_
February 26th, 2009, 05:21 PM
I personally have had the privledge of working one-on-one with Brad Pattison for a number of years, as well as becoming certified as an educated trainer under him. I can absolutley say that the Brad many of you see on tv is incredibly amped up for tv ratings. With that said, he's still very true to himself and to his ideals and beliefs. I have never, EVER seen Brad display any cruel acts towards animals; his main goal is to always help the dog live the best life possible, and show families how to adjust their lives to properly look after their pets needs.

As far as Brad getting involved in the family life on his tv show 'At the End of My Leash' - dog issues and problems START in the home. If he wasn't changing the way that owners treated the dog(s) in the home, things would progress extremley slowly outside of it - or not at all. Many people *need* to have someone in their face, giving them a reality check, before bad behaviors with their animals continue to a point of danger for the dogs or people. If he was to neglect that fact, then he wouldn't be as successful as he is. He would be failing both the owner, and the dog involved.

Brad and Ceaser are so alike in many ways, their methods are different but the bottom line is that they both use 'innteruption' to correct a dogs bad behavior and rehabilitate it. As far as the comments saying that Brad uses choke collars - the comment simply made me laugh. Brad's ultimate goal is to have a dog so well rounded and adjusted that it doesn't *need* a collar, or leash, to be in the family. He uses a martingale collar which is NOT A CHOKE COLLAR - and anyone trying to say they are the same thing either has not done their research or has no clue how the martingale training collar works. It's the only collar that Brad will use, not only for it's comfort for the dog, for the effectiveness with behvaioral training, but also for it's safety. :)

Bailey_
February 26th, 2009, 05:35 PM
...You mentioned something about how Brad Pattison "closelined" dogs around tree's.

That particular excercise is specifically to teach the dog to 'look' at the owner. The dog is in no way harmed by going the opposite way around the tree, and recieves just as much of a jerk on the leash as the owner who went the other way.

When you drive your car, you look at the road and not the hood, correct? That's all Brad is teaching the dog to do - watch the owner, every single step of the way, and FOLLOW instead of lead, which as a trainer - you will know - can be a very dangerous thing when a dog believes it can lead on the leash.

It's quite slanderous to comment on the methods of another trainer, taking things so far as to paste 'abuse' to his name, without actually ever talking to him or taking time to understand why he does certain things. Tsk, tsk.

jakhi
February 26th, 2009, 09:11 PM
I have followed this thread for quite a while and felt the need to add a few things.

Dekka...I understand not using harsh adversives. What I'm having a problem with is how you would teach a completely untrained dog a new behavior without telling them what you did or did not want. This method seems incredibly unbalanced, and confusing to the dog. I am a trainer at PetsMart, I'd like to think a pretty good one, and what I've been taught to use is a simple "uh uh". This is meant to simple tell the dog that wasn't what I wanted. It's a teaching tool. Just like using "good" as a marker for positive behaviors.

I deal with a lot of puppies and I can't imagine how confused they would be if they were never told what they did wasn't what was asked for. I do agree that people need to set the dog up to win, and be more creative about it. I do not use leash pops, chokes, prongs, shock collars, or any other form of adversive. But I just can't see how you could teach a puppy to sit using ONLY positives.

That being said, that heel was amazing! It must have taken a ton of work.

Bailey_: Have you read anything not given to you by Brad Pattison or his school about reading dog body language? Have you ever seen a video made to show dog body language and how it changes depending on circumstances that was not made by brad Pattison or his school?

I have been around dogs for ages and watching his show makes me uncomfortable. I agree that some people do need to be told that what they are doing is wrong. I agree that some people won't learn unless you get in their face a little. but I do NOT agree that he should take it out on the dog. The strong leash yanks that he gives are generally an over correction. If the dog is simply not sitting I don't believe that you are 'teaching' it by hanging it in the air until it's stressed out, fear controlled, and quickly becoming oxygen deprived brain catches on.

Also, in a recent episode i saw an owner couldn't get the dog to sit using his method. He demonstrated numerous times, but to me what he was doing and what she was doing looked completely different. He would hold the leash up, then pull it back towards the dogs rear. The owner simply pulled up. He was setting himself up to win and not giving her the appropriate tools, while humiliating her by showing how she couldn't do it over and over. That is irresponsible and rude.

Teaching the dog to look at you can easily be accomplished. There is no need to clothesline the dog to teach this. Also, your statement that the dog felt the same pull as the person is not true or fair for many reasons.
Brad probably weighs about 200lbs, lets say 150lb to be generous. A husky tops out around 75lb and that would be a huge husky. There is no way the amount of force would be felt the same by these two bodies. Also, he made the choice to change directions to quickly for the dog to see, since the dog was busy worrying about how it would avoid the tree as well, forcing it to either go to the other side of the tree or to run into it. No animal or human would ever willingly run INTO an object. This was an unfair demonstration.

I encourage you, Bailey_, to read some literature on how dogs evolved, on how they interact between themselves with no humans, and to try and teach a dog using clicker training. See how it works, see what you get out of the dog at the end. Clicker training teaches a dog to solve puzzles, Brad's methods teach the dog to fear you and always look to you for everything...what happens if the owner surrenders the dog for some reason?

To everyone else here, if you haven't done it already check out Brad's forum. In particular this section on 'Pinning'. URL="http://www.bradpattison.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=105&func=showcat&catid=60"]http://www.bradpattison.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=105&func=showcat&catid=60[/URL]

I was interested in Brad's method, and I do still watch his show (more out of concern than anything else), so I decided to do some research. This section in particular is very telling. And shocking. This section changed my mind completely. They hide it way at the back, you really have to look for it which is why i posted the link.

As far as Caesar goes I think he's got some things right. Mostly the fact that he teaches confidence. I do agree that if you are 'asking' your dog, they won't listen. If you are mousey and don't stand up for what you've asked for your dog will walk all over you. But I disagree with a lot of the other things he does. that being said i don't have a ton of experience, and I don't work with dogs that are THAT aggressive. maybe if I did I'd agree with him more. *shrugs*

Anyways, that's all I've got to say for now.

Bailey_
February 27th, 2009, 11:42 AM
Thanks for your input on this subject. I've been finding it quite interesting, everyone's opinions and ideals about behavioral training (which clicker training is *not*, and yes, I have been involved with clicker training and have clients who have come to me after quite unsuccessful sessions with it - in particular a very stubborn South African Boerboel and her owner) and think it's great that there's so much awareness about what people like and don't like.

You asked if I have read anything not given to me by Brad Pattison, and I the answer is a resounding yes. I would not be the kind of dog trainer or rehabilitator I want to be, if I had not. My training experience did not start with Brad Pattison either, rather I took four years of schooling to learn animal behavior through Everest College; have six years working with two different established dog training schools in BC, and have been running my own business for four years. I have experience with treat training, clicker training, agility training, and behavioral training. I have my degree in animal science, and have had the awesome opportunity to visit the Wolf Park in Indianna.
I am very well aware of a canines body language and have much more education under my belt than what I've had the pleasure and opportunity to learn from Brad.

I completley agree with you that if something makes you uncomfortable - then you shouldn't do it. Just like I think clicker training is a complete waste of time, some people will think that Brads methods are whooey. I would never clicker train any of my clients dogs, or my own, and those who don't like Brad should find what works for them. Absolutley.

Brad gives a strong correction, for a dog that needs it. In the dominant dog world, a nice light correction to innterupt the dog - simply does not work. What do you think would be more stressful and annoying on the dog? One firm correction that it can understand? Or a million little useless tugs here and there, which do nothing but aggrivate the dog and the situation?
He does not however give a strong correction for dogs that don't need them, and by saying he does, it's obvious to me that you've never seen Brad in action - watching a video clip on youtube or a tv show for half an hour does not even come close to experiencing the truth behind his methods or teachings. Simple as that. I would be much more inclined to listen to those of you who *have* met Brad, been to one of his classes, discussed his reasoning to his face, asked your questions; than those of you who are making judgement calls and assumptions based on 'what tv shows you'.

As far as what you're saying about him lifting the leash and pulling it to the dogs rear - that's completley wrong and is not the way he uses that particular excercise to make the dog sit. Like I said previously, tv is not the right way to assess his training tools.

As far as the tree excercise goes, like I said previously, it's a real life everyday tool to show the dog that they are to focus on their owner. It absolutley in no way harms the animal, I run poles and tree's with all of my dogs and my clients dogs, and at the end of the exercise we have satisfied - happy - content dogs; their minds are being worked, they learn how to respond quickly, and it's extremley fun for both dog and owner. Just like when we take the dogs over benches, through thickly wooded areas, downtown around street lamps, etc. There are *many* ways to teach a dog to watch where you are going. This is one of them, which does not harm the dog in ANY WAY. That is all.

His goals are and always have been to teach the dog to be in real life situations, with a lot of distractions, and yet to watch the owner. Which is why, if a dog he trained was surrendered, the family would essentially have a wonderfully well-rounded dog that looked to it's new owner for direction.

In regards to his pinning exercise (another word for that is 'lie down') what exactly did you find disturbing about that? I'm curious.

I highly encourage YOU now, to be more active in the dog-training world. Watching a show and actually talking to a trainer; are two different things. If I had never had experience with clicker training, I absolutley would not comment on it. Just a few thoughts.

Thankyou for yours.

maui_blue_eyes
February 27th, 2009, 11:50 AM
Pawbaby,

I really think you should contact the SPCA about what you witnessed at the seminar. I encourage anyone who has seen any kind of abuse to do the same. The SPCA cannot act unless these incidents get reported.

pattymac
February 27th, 2009, 02:32 PM
As a former Brad follower, notice the former, I discovered that his methods weren't working for my dog and yes I've been to one of his seminars and done one of his street safety classes in Ottawa.

I can't really see how clicker training is a waste of time. I suppose though if you subscribe to the whole dominance theory pile of you know what and believe Brad's theory that every dog is trying to run your household and control your life given half an inch of leeway then I suppose clicker training won't work for you. So if clicker training doesn't work then why do the methods in the book Click to Calm work. I suppose you've read it? (Bailey)

I see so many Brad people claim that treats don't work or they have to keep using them. Umm so far my dog is 'treat trained' and I don't need a treat to have her sit or down or stay or come from across a field when she's out running. I don't even have to call her in that situation, just start moving away from her and she comes running. I also use a clicker for teaching tricks, which by the way works very well. I also use targeting.

I guess for people who want a dog who doesn't have much of an opportunity to think for themselves and just want a passive house dog then go ahead and train with his ways. I much prefer a dog who can think and learn and enjoy it. I'd much rather see a dog heeling and watching it's handler with a wagging tail and happy expression then one heeling because it knows it will get jerked back into position if it puts a foot ahead.

BenMax
February 27th, 2009, 03:04 PM
All I can say is that dog training is not cookie cutter. Every dog is as unique as we humans are. What works on one does not necessarily work on another.

I am old school but have learnt various training methods from other trainers and just the everyday person. What ever I don't agree with I discard. I usually use a process of elimination to see what works best for the dogs.

Most dogs I get are either aggressive or terrified. Even for these two types of behaviours (from one extreme to the other) is not generic for every case I get.

For me however, I am not a good 'clicker trainer' - due to coordination perhaps.:laughing: (but I am serious). NILF has been perfect for me though I do throw in a few 'alterations' here and there.

I think in general if you watch either Brad or Caeser you have to get something out of it. You may learn from them what you don't want to be - but at least you learnt something.

pattymac
February 27th, 2009, 03:09 PM
NILIF is a great method too, and I have used it as well. I find it works great for a dog who's too smart for their own good and has a bit of a stubborn streak as well. Mine has learned that the front door isn't going to open until your butt is firmly planted on the floor and now she doesn't need to be asked to sit to have her leash put on. Stopped using treats for that a loooong time ago, now the going outside is reward enough.

Bailey_
February 27th, 2009, 10:38 PM
BenMax - I absolutley agree with you. Certain types of training don't always work for certain people or their dogs, and it's great to explore different options that are successful for both owner and dog.

Pattymac - As I said in one of my comments, I am personally not a believer in clicker training - nor would I ever reccomend it for any of my clients or their dogs. I'm glad it's worked for you - just like behavioral training has worked for me. I never said it didn't work, I said it's a complete waste of time - which means that I (again) would never bother with it.
As far as clicker training is concerned - no, I have not read that book you talked about. I worked in a dog training facility for a number of years where clicker training was the main method of training; and not only did I see many unsuccessful experiences with owners and their dogs - a number of dogs became aggressive towards the clicker. Which again, is why I am a firm believer that if something's not working for you - then you should not do it. As I said before and will say again, I do not believe in clicker training. It does not mean that it wouldn't work for someone else.

I do however find it interesting that you said something about the 'dominance theory'. Many, many dogs that see Brad are very submissive animals; so it has nothing to do with dominance. The difference in itself is establishing oneself as a confident pack leader, giving the dog direction. There is a difference between having your dog 'like you' and actually respecting you. And when I use the term 'respect', I'm not talking about dominating.
I have taught clients that don't need to display any tugging or pulling or yanking of the leash. They simply need to realize *how* to reaffirm themselves as the dogs leader, and their situation changes for the better; the dog is happier, more relaxed, and the bond between owner and dog grows.
Brad's methods have helped hundreds of thousands of people gain a great trusting relationship with their animal. If it didn't work for you, then I am very glad you've found something that does.

The reason I loved his training methods so much were because they were so real. They actually DID give the dog opportunity to think for itself, think on it's feet, react with distractions available and taught outdoors in natural settings; not in a building without cars or people on bikes or little kids screaming and laughing. If anything, Brads methods gave the dogs such a well-rounded and exciting atmosphere, that I'm not really sure what you're talking about when you say - a passive house dog. A dog that respects the rules in the house? Yes. A dog that does not think and does not enjoy life? No. A dog that is able to experience many different situations? Yes. A dog that becomes some sort of clicker zombie? No.

That's the great thing about the dog world - many different types of training out there.

jakhi
February 27th, 2009, 11:53 PM
Bailey_: I would love to have the opportunity to work with Brad. I wish he would give seminars to trainers (not just 'dog owners' but professional trainers) around the country. I actually found out about his last seminar near my house the day after it ran.

That being said I wouldn't bring my dog. The reason for that being the exact thing that horrified me on the forum.

Brad's book, which I can't currently find the name of, suggests a method of training called 'Pinning'. This means you use either a 'soft pin' (stand on the leash and slid your foot until the dog is forced to lie down) or a 'hard pin' (hold the dog by the collar and force it to lie down, then pull it into a sit) in reps. It suggests that you do 20-30 reps of pinning 2x per day.
This is why i find it awful.

In the dog world dogs do not 'pin' each other to force submission. A submissive dog OFFERS this type of a position to the alpha dog. The only time a dog would be physically forced into lying down would be during an actual attack.

To my mind what this book suggests is that you physically attack your dog, in reps. That you attack your dog over and over and over. That is horrifying.

On top of that on the forum there were other suggestions. If your dog goes limp he hasn't given in, he is just trying to control you. If your dog does this the recommendation is to keep going, don't let the dog control the exercise.
To me going limp is a sign of your dog mentally collapsing, of retreating into itself because it is being assaulted by the person it is supposed to trust.

I would never agree with this. If I ever tried something like this on my dog she would never trust me again. Aside from the fact that i completely disagree with this I think it's dangerous. What if the wrong person does this to a aggressive dog? Their hands are right next to it's head. This is a published book! Some random guy is going to try this and get bit!

As far as clicker training goes if you do it correctly it will work. If it has been explained incorrectly, or if the parent is lazy with the beginning stages of course it won't work! Just like most methods that require more than a token effort it won't work if you skimp on effort.

I have seen things that Brad does that I like, but by and large I disagree with what I have seen. If seeing a tv show isn't an accurate picture of what his training is like why even bother making a show? Why not just run infomercials for his training?

As for dog's needing a strong correction that's not the case if you do it at the right time. If you wait until the dog is hugely worked up (ceasar says 'level 10 intensity) then yeah you'll need to work to get the dog's attention. if you correct it as soon as tension starts building you shouldn't need to yank on the leash.

There was one episode that made me wince in particutar, a large great dane was unruly to walk or control. So he put a martingale collar on it and yanked as hard as he could more than once. He obviously had not done his research on that breed. Great danes are prone to wobblers, a disease where they lose control of their motor functions due to compression of spinal nerves. It has been well proven that storng leash corrections can cause wobblers in danes. The idea that he would treat this dog in a way obviously inappropriate for the breed was frightening.

I disagree that using treats is a crutch. I believe if a dog does something good they should get something for it. Whether that's praise, toys, or treats. When you go to work, you get paid. Do you go to work because you love your boss? Do you give your all at work because you respect your boss as a leader? What if they didn't pay you?

I find treats/toys to be the fastest way to get a dog's attention that does require me to physically harm it or cause it discomfort. To me that outweighs 'instant' results every time.

maui_blue_eyes
February 28th, 2009, 10:38 AM
I was also once a Brad follower. I found my dogs got worse when I started with his stuff. Namely the pinning, the running around trees & obstacles, and my dog got worse offleash. They were not trusting me anymore. A story about pinning....at first my husky would resist, but eventually she gave in. She seemed to rebel against me after I started this. I could only manage to do it for a few days. I hated the looks she gave me. I tried to with a lovely foster dog that I had, he was a very submissive dog no problem behaviour, but Brad's book suggested to do this excercise on every dog. So I tried with this guy...and he fought. He fought very hard, he cried, and scratched, but eventually he gave in. And then afterwards, he shut down for about 15 minutes. I believe that pinning is very psychologically damaging to the dog, the owner, and can be very physically dangerous to the person doing this as well, since most dogs will rebel. I think it's awful.

Now I would like to say this was several years ago. I know there were some things not right with this training. I began to learn more and more about dog training and behaviour and am now a certified trainer working professionally. I have the best relationship I have ever had with my dog and she is better behaved than ever and not afraid to be herself and I trined her with treats and clicker training. I think if you say clicker training isn't working it is not being used properly. The problem with clicker training for the average owner, is you need to have good timing. Many people can't master that, which is why it will not work. But, anyone can utilize the philosopy.

There are good parts of Brad's method, but he did not invent them they are borrowed, and they do not make up for his abuse in other areas.

pattymac
February 28th, 2009, 12:36 PM
I had the same reaction to Brad's training from my dog..maybe it's something to do with the mix..that Husky mind just won't take that kind of treatment. It's taken her a while but she's turning into a great dog. It's funny but the way people who use Brad's methods talk, you'd think their dogs would be perfect but I read them talking about all sorts of issues destructive behaviors in the house, not listening etc.

Maybe I've just been lucky with my dogs but I've never had issues with destructive behavior etc. Bayley liked to argue with me as a pup and she was pretty feisty with her mouth...used a few bandaids while she still had those razor sharp puppy teeth. She learned not to chew on mom without me using any force and if she wants to wrestle she knows she needs a toy in her mouth. She also has great bite inhibition and never puts any pressure on skin with her teeth.

I tried the pinning exercises...hahahhahaha what a joke. If I read something in a training book that recommends that I wear long sleeves and oven mitts to protect myself well then I gotta wonder!! I'm not training my dog for Schutzhund!!! Yes I even have his book. Now umbilical is great and for awhile I thought it was one of his 'inventions' until I found out different.

Now as for clicker training, sometimes my timing is off so I'm not great at it and will quite often just use Yes as my marker. So yes it is a skill to get the timing right and so many people just want the quick fix and aren't willing to learn to get the timing right. I guess it's easier for them to use the yank and crank style of training. I suppose it's easier to just give your dog a good yank on the leash for pulling then to stop and wait for the dog to come back and reward and then continue.

Anyway that's my take on the whole thing, now I have to go out in the -15 c cold and take my dog for a run...Thank goodness the sun is out today :)

Bailey_
February 28th, 2009, 05:12 PM
Jakhi: I agree with you, I think it's a wonderful experience to talk to different trainers. In my personal experience of running my own behavioral training, I've had the privledge of taking what I find works and throwing out what I find does not. There are so, so many different methods out there; all to achieve the same goal. A happy dog that has a great bond with it's owner.


In the dog world dogs do not 'pin' each other to force submission. A submissive dog OFFERS this type of a position to the alpha dog. The only time a dog would be physically forced into lying down would be during an actual attack..

Actually, this is not correct. A mother or dominant female dog in the pack will pin another unruly puppy or dog to establish dominance. Dogs also pin one another down while playing, as I often see in my pack.

Many people try things they see on tv, or read in books. I have seen countless clients come to me after unsuccessful attempts at trying what they've read or watched on tv about Ceaser Milan or Brad Pattison have apparently done. If a person gets bitten by their dog because of attempting something without consulting a proffessional first, then who's fault really is that?

You say clicker training works if the timing is right, but that has nothing to do with why I personally am not a fan. Clicker training is usually accompanied with treats, and the theory is that when the dog hears the clicker they will associate their good behavior with a reward. It's great if that works, but I have seen MANY dogs fail at this - and here's why.

There are many breeds, and many individual dogs - who are simply not food motivated. Not only that, when a distraction occurs, like a car or a person on a bike, the stimuli to chase offered is much higher for their mind than possibly getting a treat.
With that said, I'm glad it's worked for you and your dogs. But it also does not work for many other people and their dogs.

In my opinion, your dog should do what you've asked because it *wants* to please you - not because it may get a small piece of chicken when it hears the click.


As for dog's needing a strong correction that's not the case if you do it at the right time. If you wait until the dog is hugely worked up (ceasar says 'level 10 intensity) then yeah you'll need to work to get the dog's attention. if you correct it as soon as tension starts building you shouldn't need to yank on the leash...

I am currently working with a two year old border collie and his owners; who brought him home from the local humane society a few months ago. Max (the border) has *huge* fear aggression issues that we've been working through for the past three weeks, successfully. He is absolutley not food motivated, and after taking him to some clicker-training classes, they sought me out. In his situation, clicker absolutley would not work.
And he is the perfect example of what I was stating before - this is a very insecure dog that displays aggression so quickly that a firm correction IS needed right away - to get his focus and attention back on the owner. It's obviously a matter of giving him an innteruption *before* he escalates to the red zone, giving him that innteruption before even *he* knows how to react to whatever is coming his way - HOWEVER, when you say 'if one waits until their dog is worked up' you have to realize that in many cases - there is absolutley no waiting at all. It comes as quickly as a blink of an eye, and there are many things that trigger this insecurity to hit this wall and explode.

I work with many aggressive dogs, and I can tell you that clicker training these cases - DOES NOT WORK. If it does not work for these cases, I don't see how it's a flawless form of training, one that can be relied on.

If treats work for you and your dog, great. Many people mistreat them, which not only causes a beggar - but also a dog that can become quite protective of it's food - steal things from the hands of little kids, etc. Brad says 'no treats' because so many people abuse them. He doesn't think that they are absolutley out of the question, but when a person begins his training methods - he prefers them to be without.
I'm able to train my dogs strictly through behavioral training, and can use treats. My dogs are not missing out on anything, are extremley happy, can be trusted in public areas off-leash, have wonderful recall, are great in their agility classes, behave perfectly around my young daughter, and I have never - ever - had to bribe them with anything. I ask, they do. Just as in the canine world, the pack leader does not reward it's pack with a million little nuggets of treats whenever they behave. Treats are something that society has lead us to believe is neccessary in training our dogs.

I back Brad's training, will always encourage everyone to look into it further and go to his seminars or lessons; even if only to confirm what they do or do not believe in.

kitona
February 28th, 2009, 06:10 PM
Bailey, are you suggesting that folks who really, really dislike brad's training methods actually give him more money to find out that they still really, really dislike him? Most of the brad-disliking people in this discussion were brad-fans and sought out different ways to train because they did not like what they were seeing and hearing from brad himself. They've been there and done that. I do not have to give him my hard earned money to know he's not a trainer/behaviorist/rehaber that I want to have anything to do with. I'd sooner spend my money on books and seminars by real trainers/behaviorists, not some jumped-up ''lifecoach''.

Bailey_
March 1st, 2009, 09:23 PM
Kitona: haha, fair point. Well taken.

I just mean that one cannot get a complete understanding by watching his tv show or reading a book. There are a few people that have also posted some innaccurate details about his training, but who have never actually been to a seminar or seen him in action. And I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't believe in a particular type of training needs to try it out before being able to say they don't like something. Freedom of choice, right? However I don't think it's a fair ruling to have such absolutely wrong ideas of how he trains or what he does from watching 'At the End of My Leash'.
I've known Brad going on four years, have seen his work in many area's and situations; to be able to confidently say that you cannot expect a tv show to give you the true reality of his methods. A camera shot does not always correctly display what's actually going on and it cuts a LOT out for time restraints; which is why I encourage those who have questions to actually seek him out.

With that said, speaking from experience, behavioral training is such an extensive career that I absolutley embrace all different types of accomplishing the final result. This does not mean to say that I agree with all the behavioral trainers out there, but when I find methods and tasks that I agree with and am comfortable using on my dogs and those of my clients; I absolutley will support it.
Because Brad is a life-coach, I can say that it has given him a different perspective than say, someone else who is not. I don't think it hinders him at all.

kitona
March 2nd, 2009, 12:28 AM
Just as anyone can hang out a shingle and call themselves a dog trainer/rehaber, anyone can do the same and call themselves a lifecoach. And if you make two cents as a lifecoach, you can then call yourself a professional lifecoach. There's no regulation whatsoever on either of these so-called ''professions''. All brad has done is cobbled togather some dog training methods from the '60's, added some truely abusive twists, and now claims to be some kind of hot-shot guru. After seeing the public face of the man, I have zero desire to see any more. Not when there are so many positive, proven paths to take toward being closely companionable with your dog(s) and vice versa.
That being said, I'm really glad for you and your dogs that you have a great life togather! Long may you run.

Bailey_
March 2nd, 2009, 12:33 PM
There's no regulation whatsoever on either of these so-called ''professions''. All brad has done is cobbled togather some dog training methods from the '60's, added some truely abusive twists, and now claims to be some kind of hot-shot guru.

I find it interesting you say that there's no 'regulation' on being a dog-trainer. From experience, I can say without a doubt that : the proof is in the pudding.

None of my clients would come to me, or would reccomend me to their friends and family, if I wasn't successful at what I claimed to be good at. I would *never* continue to bring my dog or child to someone who was failing to reach a goal that I expected them to achieve, and I think the same fact is true with every other dog owner or parent out there.

It's true that anyone can call themselves a 'dog trainer' - but, there certainly ARE "regulations", as you put it. The fact that there is an obvious line between those who cannot accomplish something and those who can. A dog trainer and rehabilitator should be someone that has education and knowledge about dog behavior, instinct, language and breed. Experience is an asset. It's a wonderful and rewarding job, but also a very complex and intense one. Not everyone can be successful at it, which is exactly why there ARE regulations and there ARE lines that can be obviously seen when someone calls themselves a 'trainer'.

As far as Brad using methods from the 60's - wherever he found his methods, is not the point. Are you also suggesting that someone who is now a treat-trainer or clicker-trainer is not 'valid' because they did not 'invent' the idea?

I'm glad that there are many opinions about training and about what suits their family and their pets needs. Without these varied thoughts, I would most certainly be out of a job. lol What I can say, and have been saying through every post - is that if it doesn't work for you, then don't do it.

BenMax
March 2nd, 2009, 12:59 PM
I find it interesting you say that there's no 'regulation' on being a dog-trainer. From experience, I can say without a doubt that : the proof is in the pudding.

None of my clients would come to me, or would reccomend me to their friends and family, if I wasn't successful at what I claimed to be good at. I would *never* continue to bring my dog or child to someone who was failing to reach a goal that I expected them to achieve, and I think the same fact is true with every other dog owner or parent out there.

It's true that anyone can call themselves a 'dog trainer' - but, there certainly ARE "regulations", as you put it. The fact that there is an obvious line between those who cannot accomplish something and those who can. A dog trainer and rehabilitator should be someone that has education and knowledge about dog behavior, instinct, language and breed. Experience is an asset. It's a wonderful and rewarding job, but also a very complex and intense one. Not everyone can be successful at it, which is exactly why there ARE regulations and there ARE lines that can be obviously seen when someone calls themselves a 'trainer'.

As far as Brad using methods from the 60's - wherever he found his methods, is not the point. Are you also suggesting that someone who is now a treat-trainer or clicker-trainer is not 'valid' because they did not 'invent' the idea?

I'm glad that there are many opinions about training and about what suits their family and their pets needs. Without these varied thoughts, I would most certainly be out of a job. lol What I can say, and have been saying through every post - is that if it doesn't work for you, then don't do it.


I agree. I can also add that there are schools that you can attend which will provide a certificate that you accomplished a course in dog training. Regardless, it is hands on and hanging out with others where you get real experience. Again a certificate is only as good as the results someone produces. I have seen vets that should not be vets, or lawyers that should not be lawyers.

I for instance hung out with a trainer for the Surete de Quebec many years ago. I got to experience how he trained and it was quite interesting. There was very little that I could use in training 'normal house pets' but I was able to extract some very valuable information on how to work with aggressive dogs.

I travelled around abit and went to seminars and watched what people did. Somethings I liked and others not so much but I must admit I tried before I threw out some methods.

I have found great success training with my own dogs which assisted in the training. I studied the behaviour and tried to mimic or modify where I could on my own without my dogs. Everything was about balance and how each and every dog responded to methods and tools (certain collars, leashes etc) - no dogs were the same really.

So even though someone may not have the title 'trainer' does not mean that they cannot train. Thankfully I have enough following were I am trusted. To be very honest with all of you - if there is a dog I cannot reach or teach, I have no problem with asking another trainer to take over....again I watch, learn and listen.

jakhi
March 2nd, 2009, 01:10 PM
Since this thread is huge I'm not going to go back over and check if this has been brought up.

I would love to see brad train a different type of animal. Like cats. Or an orca. Dolphins...

Part of what I love about clicker training is how versatile it is. You can't 'take control' of an orca...it would eat you. I think that the best training methods are transferable to many species. I I think for me that's really what it comes down to.

I have 4 cats, and I train the youngest 2. My boys sit on cue, they know 'touch' (touch their nose to a stick), doing both of these cues I can move them anywhere I want to. I suppose I could do umbilical with them...but I have a hunch I wouldn't like the outcome. I can't imagine trying to train these boys using brad's methods. It just wouldn't work. They do it because they enjoy it, and they have learned to love the clicker.

I can't be their 'pack leader' because they don't think that way.

Also, have you read this study? Here (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090217141540.htm)
What about this one? Here (http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/dvm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=478746)

Someone on another forum posted these for everyone to look at. Again, not sure if they've been posted here but they're sure worth the read!

BenMax
March 2nd, 2009, 01:15 PM
Well I read only the title 'if you are aggressive then your dog is aggressive'. That I so do not believe in at all as I am aggressive and always had 'power' dogs that were as gentle as doves. Maybe if someone who is aggressive and transfers that aggression to their pet - even then it can go either way - having an aggressive dog or a highly (un-naturally) submissive broken dog.

Again, all dogs are different, even within the same litters. So again, the training may be not uniform for all.

I really dislike Brad - I cannot get past his attitude. I have seen him challenge a dog and he ended up packing up the dog and sent him back to the shelter - to me this was a complete cop out! Caeser on the other hand works with them even when he is bitten - he does not give up and I have to give him props for that.

Bailey_
March 3rd, 2009, 06:25 PM
Well I read only the title 'if you are aggressive then your dog is aggressive'. That I so do not believe in at all as I am aggressive and always had 'power' dogs that were as gentle as doves. Maybe if someone who is aggressive and transfers that aggression to their pet - even then it can go either way - having an aggressive dog or a highly (un-naturally) submissive broken dog.

Again, all dogs are different, even within the same litters. So again, the training may be not uniform for all.

I really dislike Brad - I cannot get past his attitude. I have seen him challenge a dog and he ended up packing up the dog and sent him back to the shelter - to me this was a complete cop out! Caeser on the other hand works with them even when he is bitten - he does not give up and I have to give him props for that.

BenMax, I highly agree with you here. There is a huge difference between being aggressive with training and teaching; and being ABUSIVE. I am also a very forward and "aggressive" trainer with my dogs, in the aspect that I am firm and expect a certain behavior from them. I am their alpha. Period.
(I also totally understand what you're saying about Brad. He actually advised me to take a young german shepherd to the SPCA after she was displaying bad aggression at a very young age after she was removed from her mother at 5 weeks of age. I of course, did not, as my views on this are quite different from his. However, in his defence, he has unfortuantley seen many - many dogs put down and many of them without homes. With that said, I don't condone his quick assessment to take a dog to the SPCA if it's not working out in one home.)

I like to challenge their minds, and have always had very trustworthy animals - those that are respectful towards all humans, and never an aggressive animal.
I believe if someone was to misuse certain training techniques, or not carry them out properly or effiecently (be it behavioral, clicker, treat training); then yes - that could most certainly result in a bad situation; which again brings me back to what I was saying before. A trainer stands out by his accomplishments - whether or not he can achieve a goal through his knowledge about dog individuality and circumstance.

Jakhi: VERY COOL what you've accomplished with your cats. That's so great!

I can see what you're trying to say with the clicker training, but to put my two cents in (again, lol) - I'm a dog trainer. I don't attempt to train orca's, as I have not studied their behavior or their language or their mating cycles or their instinct. ALL animals will respond to food. To go deeper than that, in my opinion, is what really makes someone the best rehabilitator for that species; someone who can take food out of the picture, and look at the animal one-on-one and help it's situation for the better. It's much harder to do, takes a lot more effort on the part of the trainer, and from what I have seen with behavioral training in dogs - has incredibly long lasting results.

Stacey0202
March 5th, 2009, 09:24 PM
As a former Brad follower, notice the former, I discovered that his methods weren't working for my dog and yes I've been to one of his seminars and done one of his street safety classes in Ottawa.

I can't really see how clicker training is a waste of time. I suppose though if you subscribe to the whole dominance theory pile of you know what and believe Brad's theory that every dog is trying to run your household and control your life given half an inch of leeway then I suppose clicker training won't work for you. So if clicker training doesn't work then why do the methods in the book Click to Calm work. I suppose you've read it? (Bailey)

I see so many Brad people claim that treats don't work or they have to keep using them. Umm so far my dog is 'treat trained' and I don't need a treat to have her sit or down or stay or come from across a field when she's out running. I don't even have to call her in that situation, just start moving away from her and she comes running. I also use a clicker for teaching tricks, which by the way works very well. I also use targeting.

I guess for people who want a dog who doesn't have much of an opportunity to think for themselves and just want a passive house dog then go ahead and train with his ways. I much prefer a dog who can think and learn and enjoy it. I'd much rather see a dog heeling and watching it's handler with a wagging tail and happy expression then one heeling because it knows it will get jerked back into position if it puts a foot ahead.

Well said pattymac.:thumbs up

IluvZeus
March 6th, 2009, 06:40 PM
I haven't posted in here in forever. A lot of time has passed since I first got my little Zeus and he's now grown huge at 11 months.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/377/newpictures028.jpg

I have watched Brad's show, even visited his forum. I have incorporated some of his methods. Mainly the umbilical, running around obstacles. Since I had him it's been nothing but positive reinforcement and lots of socialization, with everything, everyone of all ages, I even walked around with crutches, canes, umbrellas. I never really subscribed to the whole 'alpha' roll thing nor the 'pinning' exercise, if only because luckily for me, my dog is extremely submissive and always has been. He's never done anything to deserve such harsh treatment and has always looked up to me with respect and love. I guess whatever works for one person, might not work for another and I would never discount someone's methods if they work for them. I read many different books, from many different sources. From Brian Kilkenny and Sarah Wilson to the Monks of New Skete (who have fabulous GSD lines and have amazing results with their training techniques as well)
I'm proud to report that my now 11-month old dog is a great guy to have around. He's funny, quirky, well behaved, and friendly as all get out. Not a jumper on people, but boy, will he lick your fingers. And so gentle with little wee ones. He sometimes pulls a bit on the lead, but I just stop, tell him to sit and we sit there for a while, and then we start up again, he's right beside me, all calm as pie. (Can pie really be calm? But, I digress.)
Oh, and on a completely somewhat related-but different note, it would seem the brad pattison site is down due to non-payment of account. Interesting.

cell
March 6th, 2009, 06:59 PM
Oh, and on a completely somewhat related-but different note, it would seem the brad pattison site is down due to non-payment of account. Interesting.

I just checked for laughs and you are right, hilarious... The speculation as to why a celebrity site could not post web hosting payment on time is a endless supply of giggles.

Lynne_B
March 6th, 2009, 08:59 PM
They're currently transferring the website over to a new host and developer, so until that's done the forums and the site will be down, but if you want to continue any discussions in the meantime, go to the Facebook group, "The Bradies". See you there!

cell
March 7th, 2009, 08:07 AM
Responsible web masters would have ensured the new site was functional before dropping the old one.

maui_blue_eyes
March 7th, 2009, 09:50 AM
His site is back up now, it was not down for long.

downtowntrainer
March 10th, 2009, 08:14 PM
If treats work for you and your dog, great. Many people mistreat them, which not only causes a beggar - but also a dog that can become quite protective of it's food - steal things from the hands of little kids, etc. Brad says 'no treats' because so many people abuse them. He doesn't think that they are absolutley out of the question, but when a person begins his training methods - he prefers them to be without.
I'm able to train my dogs strictly through behavioral training, and can use treats. My dogs are not missing out on anything, are extremley happy, can be trusted in public areas off-leash, have wonderful recall, are great in their agility classes, behave perfectly around my young daughter, and I have never - ever - had to bribe them with anything. I ask, they do. Just as in the canine world, the pack leader does not reward it's pack with a million little nuggets of treats whenever they behave. Treats are something that society has lead us to believe is neccessary in training our dogs.

I back Brad's training, will always encourage everyone to look into it further and go to his seminars or lessons; even if only to confirm what they do or do not believe in.


Bailey,

Is there any situation where Brad does condone treats? I mean you specifically mention " He doesn't think that they are absolutley out of the question," So can you describe to me a situation where this would be condoned?

I ask this because as a trainer (that does NOT use clickers/treats) I am curious as to his reasoning. I do not under any circumstances condone the use of treats in any of my classes.

Just curious as to why a "non treat" trainer would condone the use of treats in different circumstances?

Also have you titled any of your dogs? I mean at the very least placed a CD on one of them? If not, what is the reason?

Bailey_
March 10th, 2009, 10:09 PM
Bailey,

Is there any situation where Brad does condone treats? I mean you specifically mention " He doesn't think that they are absolutley out of the question," So can you describe to me a situation where this would be condoned?

I ask this because as a trainer (that does NOT use clickers/treats) I am curious as to his reasoning. I do not under any circumstances condone the use of treats in any of my classes.

Just curious as to why a "non treat" trainer would condone the use of treats in different circumstances?

Also have you titled any of your dogs? I mean at the very least placed a CD on one of them? If not, what is the reason?


Brad doesn't think treat TRAINING is the way to go. As a behavioral trainer myself, I absolutley agree with this line of thinking. However, allowing a dog to have a safe bone or a treat is not something he's fighting against.

I do not train my dogs with treats or clickers, but I will still (occasionally) give them a treat now and again. It has nothing to do with training, but rather bonding. I will never use a treat to teach a dog to 'sit', 'stay', 'heel', or work through any behavioral issues. But I have no problems with giving a dog a little treat or a chewbone after dinner.

As for putting a CD on my dogs, I absolutley have no clue what that means.

*** Edit *** Sorry, I thought you were referring to an actual MUSIC cd. (lol!) My bad. I assume you're talking about recieving a title in showing any of my dogs? The answer is no. I don't show my dogs because I have no desire to enter them into that world. I think it would be fun, but I have my dogs in agility and flyball which is much more up our alley than competing in companion dogs. Not to say that I don't think we could blow the competition away....;)

downtowntrainer
March 11th, 2009, 08:47 AM
Brad doesn't think treat TRAINING is the way to go. As a behavioral trainer myself, I absolutley agree with this line of thinking. However, allowing a dog to have a safe bone or a treat is not something he's fighting against.

I do not train my dogs with treats or clickers, but I will still (occasionally) give them a treat now and again. It has nothing to do with training, but rather bonding. I will never use a treat to teach a dog to 'sit', 'stay', 'heel', or work through any behavioral issues. But I have no problems with giving a dog a little treat or a chewbone after dinner.

As for putting a CD on my dogs, I absolutley have no clue what that means.

*** Edit *** Sorry, I thought you were referring to an actual MUSIC cd. (lol!) My bad. I assume you're talking about recieving a title in showing any of my dogs? The answer is no. I don't show my dogs because I have no desire to enter them into that world. I think it would be fun, but I have my dogs in agility and flyball which is much more up our alley than competing in companion dogs. Not to say that I don't think we could blow the competition away....;)

Thank you for answering that.

I do not have a problem with my clients giving their dogs the ocassional bone or biscuit, after all for a treat to be truly a treat it has to be given with no strings attached (ie I do not ask my dog to sit before giving him his bone).

another question for you though:

You say you are involved with flyball and agility. With both these sports, people who train in them use some form of "motivation" (bribery some may call it) to train them. I don't suppose you teach a "force fetch" to IMO properly motivate your dog?

It is either that or you are using some form of "motivation", which completely contradicts what you are doing and saying for obedience training.

I used to compete in free-style frisbee with my dogs and found when I switched over to old school philosophy of dog training I had a very difficult time teaching "force fetch" because they were so used to the "make a game, go get the nice stick" type of fetching.

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 09:18 AM
Treats, no treats...really isn't the bottom line getting the results that you want from the dog. Every dog is different and motivated by different techniques.

Is there really a right way of training? What is the right way? A question that no one has an answer to - or there will be a variation of opinions. They are all opinions based on the beliefs of the human and not the animal in question. I wonder how they would approach the question?

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 09:28 AM
Thank you for answering that.

I do not have a problem with my clients giving their dogs the ocassional bone or biscuit, after all for a treat to be truly a treat it has to be given with no strings attached (ie I do not ask my dog to sit before giving him his bone).

another question for you though:

You say you are involved with flyball and agility. With both these sports, people who train in them use some form of "motivation" (bribery some may call it) to train them. I don't suppose you teach a "force fetch" to IMO properly motivate your dog?

It is either that or you are using some form of "motivation", which completely contradicts what you are doing and saying for obedience training.

I used to compete in free-style frisbee with my dogs and found when I switched over to old school philosophy of dog training I had a very difficult time teaching "force fetch" because they were so used to the "make a game, go get the nice stick" type of fetching.


Downtown,

I actually don't use any motiviation for agility. When I run alongside the obstacles, my dog follows my lead. As for flyball, she's incredibly ball motivated and thus no other motivation was ever needed. I wouldn't have put her in flyball otherwise. ;)

BenMax,

I respectfully disagree. I do think that treats "work" for some people and their dogs. However, I believe that behavioral training is the core training for all dogs, and that if one never starts with the treat training they never need it in the future.
That would be my experience, anyway.

Blackdog22
March 11th, 2009, 10:52 AM
Bailey what do you use for rewards?

This is an interesting convo...

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 10:58 AM
Downtown,
BenMax,

I respectfully disagree. I do think that treats "work" for some people and their dogs. However, I believe that behavioral training is the core training for all dogs, and that if one never starts with the treat training they never need it in the future.
That would be my experience, anyway.

I do not dispute as I do not use treats as the FIRST method. I will however resort to this if I am not getting the required results. Through my travels and through my experience I have come to realize that whatever will motivate by which I receive the required results - I will use them. Every dog is different - some respond and others require more creative thinking in order to accomplish the task at hand.

I have grown tremendously by being open to new ideas and concepts. I do however resort (by habit) to the old school way of thinking which is not always the best way.

I think that living in a box is not the best policy for us that are faced with certain behaviours to correct...and them (the dogs and the owners)who rely on getting a safe and satisfied result in the end.

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 12:19 PM
I do not dispute as I do not use treats as the FIRST method. I will however resort to this if I am not getting the required results.

I can respect that choice. I agree that there are often situations or individual dogs that may need to have the training 'changed up' in order to be successful at it. In my experience, I have never had a client tell me that they are leaving clinical and developmental behaviorism to train their dogs through treats; but I have had MANY clients come to me after treat-training has failed them.

To me, that says more than I ever could speak for behavioral training. And the reason is simple: behavioral training speaks to a dog. Treat training is a negotiation. And now, please don't get me wrong. I do NOT think that treat training is "bad" or "wrong". I just don't think it's the *best*, and while I respect your personal choice to offer a dog treats if you find that your methods of behavioral training are not working for the dog; I would rather refer the owner & pet to *another* behavioral trainer who may be able to broach the subject with the client in a light that I may personally not see. If the dog is not responding, it's not because it wants a treat - but rather because I'm doing something wrong.



I think that living in a box is not the best policy for us that are faced with certain behaviours to correct...and them (the dogs and the owners)who rely on getting a safe and satisfied result in the end.

Absolutley. I am always open to sharing new ideas and thoughts, and if I have questions about a certain situation I will always ask and seek out the needed help. However just because I believe that behavioral training is the best way to correctly put a dog on the path that the owner wants, does not make me closed-minded.
I like to think that my searching through all training techniques, my intense study about the canine and about different training methods over the years, has led me to this place I am in now. :thumbs up

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 12:37 PM
I can respect that choice. I agree that there are often situations or individual dogs that may need to have the training 'changed up' in order to be successful at it. In my experience, I have never had a client tell me that they are leaving clinical and developmental behaviorism to train their dogs through treats; but I have had MANY clients come to me after treat-training has failed them.

To me, that says more than I ever could speak for behavioral training. And the reason is simple: behavioral training speaks to a dog. Treat training is a negotiation. And now, please don't get me wrong. I do NOT think that treat training is "bad" or "wrong". I just don't think it's the *best*, and while I respect your personal choice to offer a dog treats if you find that your methods of behavioral training are not working for the dog; I would rather refer the owner & pet to *another* behavioral trainer who may be able to broach the subject with the client in a light that I may personally not see. If the dog is not responding, it's not because it wants a treat - but rather because I'm doing something wrong.



Absolutley. I am always open to sharing new ideas and thoughts, and if I have questions about a certain situation I will always ask and seek out the needed help. However just because I believe that behavioral training is the best way to correctly put a dog on the path that the owner wants, does not make me closed-minded.
I like to think that my searching through all training techniques, my intense study about the canine and about different training methods over the years, has led me to this place I am in now. :thumbs up

Points very well taken. I must tell you Bailey that in whole I agree with you. What I find is that treat training has hindered my progess when treats are given for every little thing the dog does or is asked to do. To undo this spoiled behaviour is not much of a chore but it is frustrating.

Bailey - how do you feel about rewarding with a favourite toy? I would like to have your input. (Again - not a toy reward for peeing outside or for sitting every 10 minutes).

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 02:08 PM
Bailey what do you use for rewards?

This is an interesting convo...

BenMax & Blackdog, (Sorry BD, I didn't see your question. :o) : I absolutley believe in rewards and positive reinforcement. However as you stated Blackdog, treat training is constantly handing the dog something whenever it does something well.

My honest opinion (and I'm sure I'll get some interesting comments after posting this) is that a dog should be expected to be on good behavior at all times. So when it sits - why reward that? You asked it, so it SHOULD sit. When it heels, why reward that? Again, you asked it and that should be followed through.
I've actually just had an interesting conversation with a woman who just recently started taking her two year old bichon nuetered male to treat-training classes. (Indoor setting). She relayed that after the trainer explained to the class how to get the dogs to heel, her own bichon crouched against the floor - lying down and refusing to follow her. She told me that she was dragging her dog around like a mop. And when she asked the trainer why her dog, who normally walked fine on the leash was doing this, her trainer replied:
"Well, I'm not really sure. Probably because of the rubber mat on the floor."

....:confused:

I then asked this woman to put her dog on the leash in the house. She did so (putting me on speakerphone) and told me that when she walked forward, her dog did the same thing. Laid down, and even though she continued to walk, he would refuse to get up.
I explained to her that this situation was all about control. It had nothing to do with the rubber mat. So I asked her if she could run through the house, around her kitchen table or up some stairs. She did so, and her dog immediatley began to respect her lead and follow her. It gave him the needed wake-up call that he could NOT control his owner and the situation. By the end of the conversation, she was walking around her house and her dog was following easily.

I asked this woman why she considered treat training in the first place, and she explained that her dog was incredibly food motivated. She and her husband had thought it would be a fun experience, and great for their dog. It turns out that this kind of training was only fortifying this particulars dog need for control. The constant treats were simply bribing the dog to do something and he wasn't actually learning to respect his owner.

I give this recent example because this is exactly the kind of result I see all the time with this particular form of training. (Sorry I got off topic a bit.:laughing:)

Anyway, as I was saying, many of my clients at first want to shower their dog with kisses and pets and cuddles after accomplishing a certain goal; and I can't help but tease them. ;) I think being affectionate with your dog is great, but where along the line did society lead us to believe that coddling our pet at every small achievement is the RIGHT way to show affection?
At the end of a nice long training session, whether or not we've had some stumbling blocks with the dogs preformance, I always encourage the owner to get down on the dogs level and play with it. (Be it a game of fetch or tug of war.)

What do you both prefer?

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 02:28 PM
Actually Bailey what you say makes perfect sense - it does. Infact I am faced with the same.

If I am given a 'fresh' dog (no training at all) then I will try different techniques or methods to help facilitate the training. If I cannot do as you have indicated and treats are the way to get results - then I guess I am guilty - but I do get what I want.

For long term I do not do this however nor do I advocate to do so. After a few days the dog understands that what I ask - is what I get and it's free (no treats). They get it and they do not bug for the goodies.

I am not a treat giver - but if the situation requires so as everything else is exhausted I will do it...as much as I don't like it. It's like pee pads..(but that is another thread...hate them but I have used them as last resorts).

lia12
March 11th, 2009, 02:31 PM
I don't like either one...their methods just don't hold weight with me. I find Brad screams too much and I find Ceasar is on some kind of ego trip, and I don't get the feeling he even likes dogs, he just loves to impose his will on them and too forcefully for my taste.

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 02:37 PM
Actually Bailey what you say makes perfect sense - it does. Infact I am faced with the same.

If I am given a 'fresh' dog (no training at all) then I will try different techniques or methods to help facilitate the training. If I cannot do as you have indicated and treats are the way to get results - then I guess I am guilty - but I do get what I want.

For long term I do not do this however nor do I advocate to do so. After a few days the dog understands that what I ask - is what I get and it's free (no treats). They get it and they do not bug for the goodies.

I am not a treat giver - but if the situation requires so as everything else is exhausted I will do it...as much as I don't like it. It's like pee pads..(but that is another thread...hate them but I have used them as last resorts).

I totally understand and can respect your choice, BenMax! :) Sounds like you know how to get results, which by and large is certainly the most important point.

ps: I HATE pee pads too. :laughing:

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 02:42 PM
ps: I HATE pee pads too. :laughing:

:offtopic: don't get me started with those. I can kick myself but I have had to do it.......(OMG - can't believe I am actually putting this in writing).:laughing:

downtowntrainer
March 11th, 2009, 02:57 PM
ps: I HATE pee pads too. :laughing:


Me three!!:thumbs up

pattymac
March 11th, 2009, 03:12 PM
I'm going to ask what some may say is a stupid question but what exactly is a 'behavioural trainer?' Other than not using treats as a reward.

Blackdog22
March 11th, 2009, 03:20 PM
I find the easiest way to train a dog is to work with only it's inherent drives.
To train effectively using drives you MUST have both consequence and reward. Training without one or the other will result in half-hearted performances and training that may be effective, but definately won't reach it's potential. I don't ever use any kind of method without both of these aspects. For me it's the golden rule and the easiest for the dog to understand.

That being said, I use a variety of methods, according to each individual. I don't think there is one way to train, not at all.

For my dogs specifically I use a ball or tug. They are high prey drive dogs, whom would do backflips for a chase. I don't reward all the time, just a few times a session to keep them motivated and intense. My dogs will work well with no reward, but I preffer them being extra ampped up doing the routine with gusto and enthusiasm....anticipating the prey item.

I don't use food on my dogs, simple because the food drive is very low.....so why would that motivate them. I will however use food on dogs with a high food drive and low everything else. I don't think it matters what you use to motivate the dog as long as you have enough common sense to use moderation. If you have a keen eye and are famliar with dog behavior, it doesnt take much to realize that the dog is a little bit too eager for the treat and nothing else....in which case, more commands, less treats, less often, yet still enough to motivate.


You have to remember that regardless of the method, the goal is to promote consistent behavior in one way or another, this can be acheived so many ways, more easily with consequence AND reward.

Bailey, form what I have gathered you are strictly against the use of food in training. I'm curious how you would go about teaching a dog to track without the use of food.

BenMax
March 11th, 2009, 03:25 PM
You see we all have different methods and philosophies and I enjoy reading about all of them. Mostly I agree but I am very flexible in my training.

One thing I never ever do is something that I read some of you do do. That is playing tug of war with your dogs are a reward either during or after training. Personally for me, any dog with prey drive - I will do whatever I can to try and curb this. Tug of war for me is something that I say NO to ...unless you tell me otherwise.

In reality, we deal with people that just want the basics in training - most importantly to be calm when walking and will listen to the basic of commands. A dog with prey drive and encouraged - how do you train them what is acceptable to chase and what is not? (I ask this question because I am a huge cat lover and all round rodent lover as well).

Blackdog22
March 11th, 2009, 03:36 PM
Well BenMax, I train very differently then what is reccomended.
I support and encourage prey drive in my dogs , because of the medium I am training in.
This sport is all about control, you would be suprised how easy it is to teach a dog to 'out' wait'...etc. all in high drive.
Look at your local police k9's for instance....all very high drive dogs, trained to be high drive. That being said, it takes many years of trainng to successfully have a dog trained in sport and you can't do it alone. Most of the serious stuff is all done under the guidance of a qualified proffessional. High drive dogs are IMO some of the easiest to teach control to, and some of the most safe, stable dogs you have ever met.

All of that being said, I also do not condone games of dominance with pets. Nor do I condone increasing prey for any reason other then practical competition for pets (flyball, for instance).

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 06:17 PM
Bailey, form what I have gathered you are strictly against the use of food in training. I'm curious how you would go about teaching a dog to track without the use of food.


Yes, that's correct Blackdog. I am a firm believer that treats are a tool that society has led us to believe is the correct way to treat a dog. In my opinion, training a dogs brain over it's stomach is a far more effective. (Not to mention can be much more difficult, which is why I believe so many stray away from it, or are of the opinion that it 'doesn't work for their dog'.)

I understand that some people on here train with treats and if thats what they like, then I'm all for supporting that choice. What I personally do believe, is that treats CAN be completley removed from the picture; whether a dog is motivated by food or not. (In fact, like the example I gave above, even IF a dog is motivated by food - often treats or food training can do more damage than good.)

When someone tells me that they had to train a dog with treats because thats what motivates the dog, I'm happy for that person if they found something they believe works. But I don't believe that treats are the ONLY motivating factor for that dog, regardless of what that person may say. I have yet to meet a canine that cannot be trained through *correct* behavioral methods, good timing, and proper reinforcement; regardless of it's 'motivating factors'. Communicating to a dog on a strictly canine level, is completley different than offering it a treat in order to have it focus on it's handler.

And to be honest, maybe I just really haven't had good experiences with treat-trainers. If I did meet one that actually had knowledge of dog behavior, and not just the knowledge of when to give that dog a piece of food, maybe I'd have a better view of the style?

As far as tracking is concerned; I absolutley believe that a dog would not need to use treats in order to track. In fact, simply using word association and scent imprinting combined with positive reinforcement I would think would work great. Of course I've never actually trained a tracking dog, so don't quote me. :) But that's what I would do!

maui_blue_eyes
March 11th, 2009, 06:34 PM
Bailey, I am curious to know what you define as "behavioural training methods" and how you deal with a dog who is only food motivated.

I am a working trainer, I have an education in learning theory, and animal behaviour as well. Food is a primary reinforcer for animals. It works for over 90% of dogs as an excellent motivator for training. I don't really understand what your method of behavioural training is, and why you do not like to use food. Here is how I use food in training:

When learning a new behaviour, let's say sit, the dog is rewarded with a very small treat ONLY while they are learning. Once they get the game well enough to be sitting reliably (80%, takes not very long at all usually) a voice cue is added. The reward is continued only for the dog sitting on cue about 6 times. Then, we start on a variable rate reward schedule, where the dog gets a treat every third or fourth time lets say, which increases the intenstiy of the behaviour, in other words they respond quicker. Do this for a few reps then decrease even more. Instead of offering food all the time, switch to a praise reward or a pet. Very quickly the dog is weaned off of getting a food reward or even a reward all the time.

You will also want to switch to using what I call life rewards, which is using things in the dogs everyday life that they enjoy to reinforce the cues you have taught. So your dog sits before feeding, going for a walk, getting a chewie or toy, being petted, and before being let offleash.

So you see, treats are a very small part of it, and in the odd case the dog is not motivated by food, I will find what does motivate them and use that instead. Whenever a new variable is added into the mix (back into learning phase) the treat rewards can be added in for a short period while the dog is learning. So if you move to training in a more distracting environment, or teach a hand signal, or add distance or duration to the cue, you will want to use a food reward for a bit when you add these new factors into training.

The very fact that you say clicker training is a waste of time makes me wary. You may not like to use an actual clicker, but it is a method that is based on learning theory foundations which can apply to all living species. Dogs, cats, dolphins, chickens, mice, and even fish can be trained using clicker training. It works, and it works well.

Blackdog22
March 11th, 2009, 06:56 PM
Do you happen to know of anyone who has used clicker training while training the track?

Sorry for all the tracking questions guys, it just happens to be my new fascination at the moment and I am interesting in learning all the different methods :)

Tracking is REALLY fun and rewarding. It could be the coolest dog activity ever.

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 07:25 PM
Maui : if you look back on my previous posts, especially my first few comments in this thread, you will see my past history and experience in training and the education I've recieved to get there. (Sorry, I just get tired of typing it ALL over again.)

What you say about needing food to train a dog that is introduced to distractions: is completley misleading. Have you ever tried doing so without using food?
I currently have a young puppy group in training, all under six months old and various breeds/sizes. I train only outdoors, and not only are these puppies obeying voice commands and non-verbal hand signals, sitting and staying until they are released out of the sit, trusted enough to sit on a busy down-town bench (while I literally CALL the dogs and run back and forth encouraging them to leave the bench - the pup does not come to me until the OWNER releases them), showing wonderful patience, learning cues like "stop" - "back up" - "release" - "down" - and have excellent recall that shows up most adult dogs at the off-leash park : I have helped their owners do all of this without on ounce of food.

You asked how I define my behavioral training methods, and the answer would be that I train according to the language that canines understand. I still use positive reinforcement, just like you use treats; except my reinforcement is by playing with the dog. Offering it different challenges in an every day situation that work it's mind instead of it's stomach.
When I train, I watch the dogs body - where is it looking? Are the front legs quivering? What position is the tail in? What stimuli is the dog reacting too? What are the ears doing? A dogs body speaks wonders to its owners, and not many know how to read it at all. Sure, it's one thing to tell if a dog is displaying submission or dominance; and another thing entirely to predict what will happen BEFORE it happens.

I don't use treats because I don't feel that they give my clients or the dogs the absolute best form of training that I can offer. And thats why, through correction, timing, and training in the real world in real everyday conditions; I am positive that behavioral training yields the kind of results I want to see.

Blackdog, I'm not sure if there have any been clicker trained dogs? Possibly! Let me know what you find. Are you putting your dogs into tracking? How cool!

maui_blue_eyes
March 11th, 2009, 09:33 PM
Yes but, can you describe to me how you actually train these dogs to do things? I recall reading about your education previously. I am asking you to describe your technique. Play is good to use as a motivator, if the dog is motivated by it. But what if you have a dog who is independent, and not toy or play motivated? Play can be an excellent motivator, for the right dog. It's been my experience that most dogs are food motivated, and not motivated enough by play and praise to focus at first. I find that using food during to first stage of training gets them motivated enough to learn, and they very quickly can be phased out. Most of the dogs I have trained are not motivated enough by play and affection to learn in a distracting environment in a manner that does not involve intimidating or physically forcing them to comply. My point is that food is a primary reinforcer for animals, and I would like to know why you have a problem with using it?

It is good that you watch the dog's body language, this is important.

In what scenarios do you use corrections? I don't really believe corrections are generally necessary during training especially with puppies. Dogs learn through direct association, and using corrections can often just lead to them having negative associations to different stimuli, or the owner.

maui_blue_eyes
March 11th, 2009, 09:39 PM
Blackdog, clicker training is simply a method of marking the correct behaviour. It is very effective when training things that involved working at a distance. You do not have to use food as a reward either. As far as I am aware it is used in all sorts of different areas, tracking, search and rescue, police dog training etc.

Instead of using a clicker, you can mark with your voice. Most people will use "yes". I've just found that the clicker is faster, more consistent, and is a unique sound that means one thing to the dog: you've done the right thing, and a reward is on the way. It's been my experience also that most dogs really respond well to the sound of the clicker, compared to using your voice as a bridge/marker.

This website has a good little description of how clicker training works and where it has been used http://www.teachingdogsllc.com/

TeriM
March 11th, 2009, 10:43 PM
Do you happen to know of anyone who has used clicker training while training the track?

Sorry for all the tracking questions guys, it just happens to be my new fascination at the moment and I am interesting in learning all the different methods :)

Tracking is REALLY fun and rewarding. It could be the coolest dog activity ever.

While I agree that treat training is overused I agree that it is a great tool in teaching new behaviours. Once the behaviour is learned then they should definately be weaned away from imo. My dog Riley had some teenage "moments" that were heading down a bad direction and my trainer worked with me to learn better leadership behaviors, recognize dog body language and learn effective correction techniques for MY dog. Basically when he got overstimulated I could have waved a slab of raw beef in front of him and it would barely compute so treat training was very ineffective. By learning to correct and prevent the behaviours instead of "bribing" to get his attention I got some amazing results and my dog definately is not "shut down" in any way. I do still use lots of treats (or a tug ball) but only when we are already in a positive working mode.

I have done tracking with my black lab Riley and he absolutely loves it! We were taught using treats but I think that is more to actually teach them to learn about scent work. We were encouraged to use smelly, yummy treats but that was quickly phased out unless learning a new phase (ie article finding). My Riley is not the most food motivated dog although enjoys his treats. I doubt I could have taught this using a ball as it is his ultimate reward and basically shuts his brain down to most of the rest of the world :frustrated: (slowly getting better with this). I think in the case of tracking that treats are extremely valuable.

Bailey_
March 11th, 2009, 11:26 PM
Yes but, can you describe to me how you actually train these dogs to do things? I recall reading about your education previously. I am asking you to describe your technique. Play is good to use as a motivator, if the dog is motivated by it. But what if you have a dog who is independent, and not toy or play motivated? Play can be an excellent motivator, for the right dog. It's been my experience that most dogs are food motivated, and not motivated enough by play and praise to focus at first. I find that using food during to first stage of training gets them motivated enough to learn, and they very quickly can be phased out. Most of the dogs I have trained are not motivated enough by play and affection to learn in a distracting environment in a manner that does not involve intimidating or physically forcing them to comply. My point is that food is a primary reinforcer for animals, and I would like to know why you have a problem with using it?

It is good that you watch the dog's body language, this is important.

In what scenarios do you use corrections? I don't really believe corrections are generally necessary during training especially with puppies. Dogs learn through direct association, and using corrections can often just lead to them having negative associations to different stimuli, or the owner.

Maui: I have YET to meet a dog that does not enjoy engaging with its owner. Show me a dog that does not like to play, and I will show you a cat. ;)

When I say "play" I don't just mean grabbing the nearest toy and shoving it in the dogs mouth. In that case, you are right, some dogs are just not interested in a certain (or all) types of toys or balls. What I mean is running with the dog, jumping up and down, getting down on the dogs level and engaging it.
I'm not sure how much experience you must have training if you say that more dogs are responsive to food than they are praise. Any dog I know gets quite happy when their owner bends down and acknowledges their hard work. If they are taught to LOOK for the treat, then yes. A person will get a faster response. However my dogs, and those of my clients, watch for direction from their handler because they are respecting the owner - not expecting a treat.

When I train, I do so outside at all times. I do not believe in indoor training in a fixed environment as I do not believe that this is 'real' for the dog. I begin training at eight weeks, and ensure that all lessons are fun and new for the dog. Because my training is outside, there are hundreds of different types of distractions, which is great because it offers us all different opportunities to see how our dogs will react in any given situation.
When you ask me how specifically I train, I can't really give you an answer that will fit in this comment box. I train a wide variety of different dogs in different situations; if I'm faced with a client that has a certain behavior they want fixed, then obviously my initial stages of training would be different than say, a client with an 8 week old puppy.
I use innteruption to discourage unwanted behavior, simply using a voice command (I'm sure you're familiar with Ceasers famous 'Shh') and occasionally tapping the dog lightly on the flank or behind the ear (just like dogs do to warn one another) gets the dogs attention. Other than that my lessons are full of challenges, and helping the owner establish themselves as the dogs pack leader.

I believe that dogs absolutley need corrections. In the canine world, when one dog is bothering another, they let eachother know it. Usually by the flattening of the ears, occasionally the snarl of the lips, and eventually by striking (but not biting) the other dog behind the ear, near it's neck, or near its tail.
I don't believe in humanizing a dog. That's where people run into problems, where they suddenly need 'treats' to get the dogs attention in a busy downtown scenario.
I have my clients take their dogs into malls, hotels, up escalators, onto C-Trains, over benches, etc. I eventually (assessing the dogs personal success, some take longer than others, but all achieve the same goal) do this all off-leash.
My goal with all the dogs I train is to achieve a dog that the client can trust in all situations, love, and have a strong bond with.

You asked when I would use corrections? When a dog is having a strong, aggressive reaction. I also know from experience and can assure you that correcting a dog at the proper time, does not create a negative response. If someone was to start attempting to correct a certain behavior, not knowing how to properly carry this out - or even with the wrong timing - then yes, I can see that being a bad situation. Which is why I always reccomend those having issues with their dogs, to seek proffesional help.

As far as treats are concerned, I have a problem with using them because I have seen MORE dogs fail at treat-training than they are successful at it. I have seen dogs become beggars, counter-surfers, and hand grabbers. I have seen treat-trained dogs with absolutley zero patience, who are even less at peace with their surroundings than those who have not had treats. I just don't like treats in conjuction with training, and that's just a personal opinion. Nothing against those who do.

TulipRoxy
March 12th, 2009, 07:48 AM
I can see what you're trying to say with the clicker training, but to put my two cents in (again, lol) - I'm a dog trainer. I don't attempt to train orca's, as I have not studied their behavior or their language or their mating cycles or their instinct. ALL animals will respond to food. To go deeper than that, in my opinion, is what really makes someone the best rehabilitator for that species; someone who can take food out of the picture, and look at the animal one-on-one and help it's situation for the better. It's much harder to do, takes a lot more effort on the part of the trainer, and from what I have seen with behavioral training in dogs - has incredibly long lasting results.[/QUOTE]

The point is not training orca's, the point is that with reinforcement methods you can easily and reliably train ANY animal any behaviour without using force or without even touching them! They work because they want to. The notion that that people have in dog training that dogs work "to please you" is rediculous. The dog is either working to gain a reward or avoid a punishment all the time, period.
Take food out of the picture? Why? Its a powerful rehabilitory tool, notice I said tool, not crutch.

What in your mind is behavioural training? You seem to have a different definition for it than I do.

Bailey_
March 12th, 2009, 10:38 AM
The point is not training orca's, the point is that with reinforcement methods you can easily and reliably train ANY animal any behaviour without using force or without even touching them! They work because they want to. The notion that that people have in dog training that dogs work "to please you" is rediculous. The dog is either working to gain a reward or avoid a punishment all the time, period.
Take food out of the picture? Why? Its a powerful rehabilitory tool, notice I said tool, not crutch.

What in your mind is behavioural training? You seem to have a different definition for it than I do.

Tulip, yes - animals respond to food. But not ALL individual animals will. When you say that you can "easily" and "reliably" train any animal without touching them, I would certainly like to see that done. How would you then approach a situation with an aggressive american bulldog that has *no* desire to look for a treat when another dog passes?
My point is that in the canine world, there are many dogs that are not food motivated - especially when stimuli triggers their instinct. And even those that are food motivated don't always respond well to treat-training, period.
Like I've said countless times, I don't think treat-training is for everyone or for every dog. And I haven't learned that from just study; but rather my experience in both the treat and clicker training world.
As a behavioral trainer, people who don't find treats work for their situation come to me and we work with their dog strictly through body language.

Most problems lie with the owner not understanding what their dog is plainly saying to them, which is why I love what I do. It's a matter of teaching the owner to understand how to properly be a dynamic leader for their dog, to give it a better quality of life, to ensure that they can achieve those results without having food in the picture.

I'm very sad that you have made the comment "the notion the dog works to please you is ridiculous". It really does show me that there are people out there who have not experienced true respect and a true bond from their dog; believing that stuffing them with treats is the absolute and only great connection that they can achieve with their dog.

Behavioral training to me, is teaching the dog through it's natural element. Working its mind, and using my body language (a step towards it's hindquarters, a quick snap of my fingers, no eye contact in some situations and lots in others) to allow the dog to really know what I'm asking. It has nothing to do with the dog avoiding punishment, as you put it.

BenMax
March 12th, 2009, 11:11 AM
Tulip, yes - animals respond to food. But not ALL individual animals will. When you say that you can "easily" and "reliably" train any animal without touching them, I would certainly like to see that done. How would you then approach a situation with an aggressive american bulldog that has *no* desire to look for a treat when another dog passes?
My point is that in the canine world, there are many dogs that are not food motivated - especially when stimuli triggers their instinct. And even those that are food motivated don't always respond well to treat-training, period.
Like I've said countless times, I don't think treat-training is for everyone or for every dog. And I haven't learned that from just study; but rather my experience in both the treat and clicker training world.
As a behavioral trainer, people who don't find treats work for their situation come to me and we work with their dog strictly through body language.

Most problems lie with the owner not understanding what their dog is plainly saying to them, which is why I love what I do. It's a matter of teaching the owner to understand how to properly be a dynamic leader for their dog, to give it a better quality of life, to ensure that they can achieve those results without having food in the picture.

I'm very sad that you have made the comment "the notion the dog works to please you is ridiculous". It really does show me that there are people out there who have not experienced true respect and a true bond from their dog; believing that stuffing them with treats is the absolute and only great connection that they can achieve with their dog.

Behavioral training to me, is teaching the dog through it's natural element. Working its mind, and using my body language (a step towards it's hindquarters, a quick snap of my fingers, no eye contact in some situations and lots in others) to allow the dog to really know what I'm asking. It has nothing to do with the dog avoiding punishment, as you put it.

Bailey I agree 100%. Well written and well expressed. As I said before, every dog is different and responds differently. Also to be taken into account which both you and Blackdog22 have noted is that training techniques and methods are used for purposes other than for just basic commands and having a nicely trained house pet. Thanks to both for reminding us of that.

TulipRoxy
March 12th, 2009, 11:56 AM
Tulip, yes - animals respond to food. But not ALL individual animals will. When you say that you can "easily" and "reliably" train any animal without touching them, I would certainly like to see that done. How would you then approach a situation with an aggressive american bulldog that has *no* desire to look for a treat when another dog passes?

I would capture the dogs attention before he got into the obsessive state that he would not respond to a command or take food. If I saw another dog coming I would say the dog's name and when the dog responded to me I would click and reward for attention. If I did not get the attention I would turn and go the other way until the dog was calm enough to again give me his attention when I said his name. If it was not possible to go the other way I would move into the dog until I captured the dogs atttention.

Also for a leash aggressive dog I would set up situations with another dog on leash in the distance not moving. I would click and reward the dog for remaining calm ( counterconditioning). This would start to change his attitude from one of aggression to actually looking forward to seeing other dogs
My point is that in the canine world, there are many dogs that are not food motivated - especially when stimuli triggers their instinct. And even those that are food motivated don't always respond well to treat-training, period.

Every dog on this planet is food motivated or else they would starve. However I would agree that in certain situations dogs are not motivated by food when the environment is too stimulating. Dogs are also motivated by play, chasing and the opportunity to get resources. So This is when I would realize that I was competing with too many other stimuli and I should back off and train in a calmer environment or not in the presence of the stimulus.

As a behavioral trainer, people who don't find treats work for their situation come to me and we work with their dog strictly through body language.

I agree understanding dogs body language is another powerful tool in addition to reinforcement training. You don't use treats in your training but you definately use reinforcement such as playing with the dog, praise, and eye contact. These are powerful reinforcers that I use as well in my training.

I'm very sad that you have made the comment "the notion the dog works to please you is ridiculous". It really does show me that there are people out there who have not experienced true respect and a true bond from their dog; believing that stuffing them with treats is the absolute and only great connection that they can achieve with their dog.

Every animal and indeed person on this planet are motivated by reinforcement or punishment. In day to day life dogs are working to make good things happen and bad things stop. I do not believe my dogs are at all interested in my internal state, except as to how that may affect them. I beleive my dogs respect me and we have an excellent bond but I do not believe that they work just to please me. I am not god to them nor do I want to be. They listen to me and perform behaviour because they have learned that that is the most predictable way to get what they want ( to go out side, to play with other dogs, to play with a toy..... and even, yes, to get food)

I am sure your training methods work very well as dogs are intellegent animals and are very adaptable. I know that I will never change your mind about using treats in training. I definately agree that there are bad treat trainers out there who never wean the dog off the food and let the dog get away with anything. I just wish you would be able to see a good postive reinforcement trainer so you could see that the methods do work.

pattymac
March 12th, 2009, 12:57 PM
Hey I'm interested in taking some courses in dog behaviour and just wondering about the course you took Bailey..is it still available? I tried googling Everest College and couldn't find anything about dog behaviour or dog training or animal behaviour. I prefer online for now as I have to work fulltime right now. Or if they have part time classes that might work for me.

maui_blue_eyes
March 12th, 2009, 02:13 PM
TulipRoxy,

My training methods are very similiar to how you described. Now i don't have to post them!

I also wanted to say, my dog is a very free spirit siberian husky, who is very catlike, and often does not want to do things for me. So I think I am biased that way, however I've trained her very well with positive reinforcement, can't force this dog into anything! I am planning on getting her CD in May.

I also wanted to comment that when a dog displays what we view as aggression, really what they are doing is displaying conflict resolution behaviour. They are using their body language to show that they are uncomfortable for whatever reason (aggression has many causes) and are asking for space. Correcting this, in my opinion, is not a valid option. You WANT the dog to show these signs, otherwise you get a dog who will strike without warning. When you correct a dog who is displaying aggression you are either creating more negative associations with whatever the dog has issues with, or towards the handler, OR punishing the dog for using their natural language. You are not addressing the root of the problem, which is probably that the dog is afraid, uncomfortable, guarding, or perhaps doesn't know how to communicate properly. In my opinion, a better technique than correcting the "aggressive" behaviour, is to figure out why the dog is displaying this language, and correct the root of the dog's issues by counter-conditioning (changing the association of the stimulus from negtive to positive) and desensitizing (getting the dog slowly used to the stimulus, gradually, starting from a point they feel comfortable).

pattymac
March 12th, 2009, 02:32 PM
Maui, I know first hand what it's like to encounter a dog that has been trained or made not to show any outward warnings of what it's going to do. Well actually my dog knows...we were at the dog park one day and there was another dog there, known for being aggressive to other dogs. Now my dog doesn't like other dogs she doesn't know well getting too close to me (something we're working on, she likes to protect me) This dog was getting into my space and hers. Now my dog gave a warning growl and most dogs respect this and will move away. This dog didn't give any warning back and went after my dog. Before I knew what happened, she had my dog down on the ground by the neck. Fortunately no damage done and it's a good thing my dog didn't get a hold of the other dog..very short coated dog and I'm sure she would've have done some damage. I think she was too surprized to have a chance to do anything. I was right there and from my view, there was no warning from the other dog. I rarely stop my dog from growling and think it's a stupid thing that a dog should not be allowed to warn. Obessive barking is one thing but a warning growl is important.

Bailey_
March 12th, 2009, 03:36 PM
PattyMac,

Theres quite a variety of different training courses you can take online to become certified, but I highly reccomend that you seek out something 'hands on' that you can take wherever you live. Experience is honestly the best teacher, and while head-knowledge and understanding dog behavior is essential - it's still best to learn this type of training by watching and doing, so that the proffessional can pinpoint any mistakes you may be making without even realizing it.
If you can find a behavioral trainer who either teaches others, or would be interested in teaching you, even better. :thumbs up
(Be careful about who teaches you, there are many people out there who claim to be 'trainers' and yet don't really know canine language; but they're easy to weed out.)
If you private message me your city I can see if there's anyone I could refer you too. :)

Bailey_
March 12th, 2009, 03:55 PM
I also wanted to comment that when a dog displays what we view as aggression, really what they are doing is displaying conflict resolution behaviour. They are using their body language to show that they are uncomfortable for whatever reason (aggression has many causes) and are asking for space. Correcting this, in my opinion, is not a valid option. You WANT the dog to show these signs, otherwise you get a dog who will strike without warning. When you correct a dog who is displaying aggression you are either creating more negative associations with whatever the dog has issues with, or towards the handler, OR punishing the dog for using their natural language. You are not addressing the root of the problem, which is probably that the dog is afraid, uncomfortable, guarding, or perhaps doesn't know how to communicate properly. In my opinion, a better technique than correcting the "aggressive" behaviour, is to figure out why the dog is displaying this language, and correct the root of the dog's issues by counter-conditioning (changing the association of the stimulus from negtive to positive) and desensitizing (getting the dog slowly used to the stimulus, gradually, starting from a point they feel comfortable).

Maui: Absolutley. I agree with this, especially desensitization. I very much believe that changing something negative into something positive for the dog is incredibly important, and yet with that said; in MY vocabulary - that IS correcting the behavior.
Correcting bad behavior does not have to be accomplished in a negative light, which I'm getting the impression that some here believe the term is used to imply.
When I am viewed with a dog displaying (lets say insecure aggression) I'm going to innterupt the behavior shown before it escalates into a dangerous situation. Watching the dogs body language allows me to anticipate it's actions before it carrys through with something. Dogs are constantly uttering warnings, like you said. Their brain signals sends their body into various poses which tell us so much.
By innteruption, I will step into the dog, occasionally making vocal sounds to get the dogs attention back on me. The goal is to keep the dogs brain from being unable to stay focused on whatever stimuli will trigger it's actions; to keep the mind and body calm. You do not need treats or constant rewards to accomplish that, or keep the dogs focus on you.
A dog does not naturally WANT to be in control of situations. And theres a difference between a dog being naturally more dominant than others, and being the leader of a pack (feeling the need to lead, or control). A dog that feels it needs to remain in control of the situation all the time, is completley stressed out - high energy - rarely calm or at peace - constantly buzzing. Aggression many times comes from this place as well; when the owners have lacked leadership and control, failing to understand what the dog is really telling them.

For those of you that treat train, could I hear some experiences of you successfully training a red-zone aggression from a dog? I'm honestly quite curious and would like to know how you carry out your methods.

TulipRoxy
March 12th, 2009, 04:53 PM
TulipRoxy,

My training methods are very similiar to how you described. Now i don't have to post them!

[QUOTE]I also wanted to say, my dog is a very free spirit siberian husky, who is very catlike, and often does not want to do things for me. So I think I am biased that way, however I've trained her very well with positive reinforcement, can't force this dog into anything! I am planning on getting her CD in May.

Yes my first dog was a siberian and you can't force them to do anything! I tried with a choker and it just didnt work... whenever she was out of my reach she would do whatever she wanted.
I discovered the clicker with her and was able to teach her all the basic behaviours and even a few tricks thrown in!
I also wanted to comment that when a dog displays what we view as aggression, really what they are doing is displaying conflict resolution behaviour. They are using their body language to show that they are uncomfortable for whatever reason (aggression has many causes) and are asking for space. Correcting this, in my opinion, is not a valid option. You WANT the dog to show these signs, otherwise you get a dog who will strike without warning. When you correct a dog who is displaying aggression you are either creating more negative associations with whatever the dog has issues with, or towards the handler, OR punishing the dog for using their natural language. You are not addressing the root of the problem, which is probably that the dog is afraid, uncomfortable, guarding, or perhaps doesn't know how to communicate properly. In my opinion, a better technique than correcting the "aggressive" behaviour, is to figure out why the dog is displaying this language, and correct the root of the dog's issues by counter-conditioning (changing the association of the stimulus from negtive to positive) and desensitizing (getting the dog slowly used to the stimulus, gradually, starting from a point they feel comfortable).

Thank you so much for this... I love how you describe that correcting signs of aggression does not solve the root of the problem but only creates a dog that will strike without warning... and that it adds additional stress. This is so true. When I was younger one of my dogs was fear aggressive and he would nip at peoples heels. I used to correct him for growling and eventually he stops growling but still nipped!

I have defiantely used non positive methods at times to train. Sometimes it just seems easier to tell your dog NO when he barks(for instance)... its relieves your frusteration and it stops the barking for a minute. But this supression is like a bandaid... eventually it falls off. It is a much better idea to figure out why the dog is barking and come up with a solution that teaches the dog alternatives to barking and when it can bark.

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 08:26 AM
Maui: Absolutley. I agree with this, especially desensitization. I very much believe that changing something negative into something positive for the dog is incredibly important, and yet with that said; in MY vocabulary - that IS correcting the behavior.
Correcting bad behavior does not have to be accomplished in a negative light, which I'm getting the impression that some here believe the term is used to imply.
When I am viewed with a dog displaying (lets say insecure aggression) I'm going to innterupt the behavior shown before it escalates into a dangerous situation. Watching the dogs body language allows me to anticipate it's actions before it carrys through with something. Dogs are constantly uttering warnings, like you said. Their brain signals sends their body into various poses which tell us so much.
By innteruption, I will step into the dog, occasionally making vocal sounds to get the dogs attention back on me. The goal is to keep the dogs brain from being unable to stay focused on whatever stimuli will trigger it's actions; to keep the mind and body calm. You do not need treats or constant rewards to accomplish that, or keep the dogs focus on you.
A dog does not naturally WANT to be in control of situations. And theres a difference between a dog being naturally more dominant than others, and being the leader of a pack (feeling the need to lead, or control). A dog that feels it needs to remain in control of the situation all the time, is completley stressed out - high energy - rarely calm or at peace - constantly buzzing. Aggression many times comes from this place as well; when the owners have lacked leadership and control, failing to understand what the dog is really telling them.

For those of you that treat train, could I hear some experiences of you successfully training a red-zone aggression from a dog? I'm honestly quite curious and would like to know how you carry out your methods.

Thank you Bailey for this. You have expressed perfectly and I could not have said this better.

With all the red zone dogs that I have received I could never ever get them to respond to treats/toys...never. I absolutely had to check them in order to get them to focus on me and once they did I would touch under their chin - that was their reward...and they knew I was pleased with their reaction - that was enough for them. Also, I would like to say that this is ALWAYS work in progress with red zone dogs. One can never be 100% comfortable - you must always be aler and always read the dogs body, signals and to feel the dog through the leash. Being an owner of one for 11 years, I could never say the old "I know my dog 100%" as no one does even with dogs that do not exhibit certain undesired behaviour - heck we don't even know ourselves 100% so how can you know an animal?

The importance of this thread is the comparison between two different behaviouralist or trainers. One does work with red zone dogs or dogs that are more difficult and the other deals more with people and dogs that he deems as 'salvageable' however will quickly discard those that he feels are not. Personally, I would want someone like Caeser to mentor me as he truly has insight and does not easily through in the towl as the other. We may not like or agree with all his methods but surely he does provide some ideas. I have had incredible success with one of his methods for insecure dogs. It has worked for me every single time and I am very pleased.

Lynne_B
March 13th, 2009, 01:40 PM
The importance of this thread is the comparison between two different behaviouralist or trainers. One does work with red zone dogs or dogs that are more difficult and the other deals more with people and dogs that he deems as 'salvageable' however will quickly discard those that he feels are not. Personally, I would want someone like Caeser to mentor me as he truly has insight and does not easily through in the towl as the other. We may not like or agree with all his methods but surely he does provide some ideas. I have had incredible success with one of his methods for insecure dogs. It has worked for me every single time and I am very pleased.

In reference to your comment on Brad's training and easily throwing in the towel, what are you referring to? I've been in his training classes, and I don't see that at all, if anything the exact opposite. He's very dedicated to his clients, and has told us multiple times that if we ever needed his help, even after we were done with classes, to let him know. Yeah he's got a busy schedule with the show and everything else he's working on, but he's always been there if we had a question for him. He has fired clients in the past (not many, but there are a couple), but he would only resort to that if they were blatantly not following what he was recommending them to do, and it was sabotaging the training, and/or making it worse. Not much you can do in a case like that though.

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 02:27 PM
He threw in the towl on a dog he lifted off the ground - he packed up the dog and brought him to the shelter - that was enough for me.

Besides that I cannot get past his attitude. It just stinks to put it bluntly.

Bailey_
March 13th, 2009, 02:28 PM
In reference to your comment on Brad's training and easily throwing in the towel, what are you referring to? I've been in his training classes, and I don't see that at all, if anything the exact opposite. He's very dedicated to his clients, and has told us multiple times that if we ever needed his help, even after we were done with classes, to let him know. Yeah he's got a busy schedule with the show and everything else he's working on, but he's always been there if we had a question for him. He has fired clients in the past (not many, but there are a couple), but he would only resort to that if they were blatantly not following what he was recommending them to do, and it was sabotaging the training, and/or making it worse. Not much you can do in a case like that though.

I'd also like to add that Brad does in fact deal with red-zone dogs, and has rescued many from a sentence of euthinasia. He also travelled with a team to Katrina and saved many dogs, rehoming them and rehabilitating them. Many people don't get to see this side of him, judging what he does stricly by his tv show which focuses his work on your average home family pet.

Bailey_
March 13th, 2009, 02:29 PM
He threw in the towl on a dog he lifted off the ground - he packed up the dog and brought him to the shelter - that was enough for me.

Besides that I cannot get past his attitude. It just stinks to put it bluntly.

Yikes. I haven't seen this episode. Do you remember what the premise of the show was about? What breed of dog it was?

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 02:31 PM
I'd also like to add that Brad does in fact deal with red-zone dogs, and has rescued many from a sentence of euthinasia. He also travelled with a team to Katrina and saved many dogs, rehoming them and rehabilitating them. Many people don't get to see this side of him, judging what he does stricly by his tv show which focuses his work on your average home family pet.

Well that is good to know - he should show that side of himself. He just has a stinky way of talking to people. If he ever told me to 'give him 20' - I would give him 20 alright.

Part of being a good trainer is not lecturing them military style. It is a huge turn off. Being straight forward is one thing, being down right ignorant and idiotic is another. He needs some serious 'bed side manner'.

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 02:34 PM
Yikes. I haven't seen this episode. Do you remember what the premise of the show was about? What breed of dog it was?

The dog was a mix shep husky or malamute I believe. It's been a while. He had the dog by the collar on it's two legs. He knew the dog was problematic yet challenged the dog right away without trying to establish somesort of relationship with the dog. He did not like what the dog was doing and just walked up to it right away. He deserved the reaction that he got from a red zone dog. He really should have known better.

Bailey_
March 13th, 2009, 02:38 PM
Well that is good to know - he should show that side of himself. He just has a stinky way of talking to people. If he ever told me to 'give him 20' - I would give him 20 alright.

Part of being a good trainer is not lecturing them military style. It is a huge turn off. Being straight forward is one thing, being down right ignorant and idiotic is another. He needs some serious 'bed side manner'.

:laughing: Yes, I agree. He's quite forward with people and I've seen him hurt more than one feeling. I think it works for him, simply because he's not doing his job to 'make friends'. He's there to help the owners with the dogs and get things done in a timely fashion. I've also seen a very sincere side of Brad too - and while I personally don't think his snappy and sarcastic comments are always needed; he's also aware of when he's crossed a line and is not slow to apologize to a person when he realizes his own mistake.

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 02:56 PM
:laughing: Yes, I agree. He's quite forward with people and I've seen him hurt more than one feeling. I think it works for him, simply because he's not doing his job to 'make friends'. He's there to help the owners with the dogs and get things done in a timely fashion. I've also seen a very sincere side of Brad too - and while I personally don't think his snappy and sarcastic comments are always needed; he's also aware of when he's crossed a line and is not slow to apologize to a person when he realizes his own mistake.

Sorry Bailey but with my character, this guy would be short of 3 very important pieces of equipment. He would be talking with a very high pitch from that day forward.:D

Bailey_
March 13th, 2009, 03:26 PM
Sorry Bailey but with my character, this guy would be short of 3 very important pieces of equipment. He would be talking with a very high pitch from that day forward.:D

:laughing:!!!!

Lynne_B
March 13th, 2009, 03:28 PM
Alright, the episode you were talking about was the Everest episode I believe. The dog was aggressive, and had already bit one of the children in the face. The family was a single mom, and two kids, the oldest was about 10 I think (the one that was bit). Because mom works, the oldest was watching little sister, and taking care of some of the responsibility of walking this dog, obviously over his head, considering the aggression problems.

Now, nowhere in this episode did they say Everest went to a shelter, or was euthanized, or whatever else always is "assumed" about this episode. They said that Everest was leaving THIS FAMILY so he could be evaluated behaviourally. Do you honestly think that it would have been the right decision for this dog to stay in this family that did not have the right tools to train him properly, and continue to have the kids in danger of being bitten?

C'mon...

This does not mean Brad gave up on this dog, this means that for this family, the dog was removed, and the family got another dog more suitable to what they could provide. The moral of the story for this episode...be careful when selecting your new family member so that you are able to provide the necessary training, exercise, etc. They ended up with a smaller dog, that the family could handle better. Do you honestly think that the "right" way to handle it for this episode would have been to help this family train this dog and rehabilitate him? Not very realistic...and while Brad may have been working with Everest off the air, the episode was about this family getting the right pet for them, which is what the rest of it was about.

As for Everest, I'm not sure what happened to him. I asked Brad once, but he has privacy rules in place for these families so that he can't reveal information like that (yeah yeah, go ahead, say whatever you want, about how convenient that is, but I'm guessing the families would beg to differ). But if this dog had already bitten a child, and continued to be aggressive, it's possible that he could have been put down, but it's also possible that he could have been placed with a family with experience in handling something like this. So for you to say that Brad "threw in the towel" is really inaccurate here. Sorry but it bothers me that people make that generalization about Brad because of this episode without really watching to see what it's really about.

Lynne_B
March 13th, 2009, 03:30 PM
Oh, and the dog up in the air was the dogs reaction to Brad evaluating his level of aggression and dominance. He started a pinning exercise (I think), and the dog got up on his hind legs to challenge him, Brad didn't lift him up to stare him down or whatever everyone "assumes" about that part of it.

BenMax
March 13th, 2009, 03:37 PM
Sorry you are so offended Lynn B - that is my opinion and this thread is opinion based.

To me my 'opinion' is that he is a total goof ball, big mouthed, idiot. My opinion can be critisized, bastersized, validated, shut down, thrown out or agreed upon...it really does not matter.

Not trying to be rude.:)

Lynne_B
March 13th, 2009, 03:47 PM
Hehe you are just as entitled to your opinion as I am, I just get frustrated when people make the wrong assumptions about something. You're welcome to have your opinions about Brad's personality in general, he knows exactly what kind of persona he puts forth, he just doesn't care if people thinks he's a jerk (sometimes :)). He knows what he's there for, and that's the well being of the dog.

I'm not offended, just trying to express that in that example you cited, he didn't throw in the towel, and again, I get frustrated when people assume that he gave up on that dog when that's not the way it happened.

In fact, I've been pretty impressed with the back and forth going on lately in this thread, I've learned a few things :), which is never a bad thing.

Oh, and I think it's safe to say that we all have a little goofball bigmouth idiot in us sometimes. I do anyway! (wait did I say that out loud)

kitona
March 13th, 2009, 07:27 PM
I don't think anyone's disputing the fact that Everest shouldn't have been in the home he was in on the episode. But a follow-up episode on the dog himself, excluding the family, and what became of him would have been interesting to see. I'd have been impressed if Brad was able to work with and turn the dog around, or turned him over to someone who could, and had shown the dog rehabilitated. Then, the rumor mills would have been put to rest and no more wild speculation on what the dog's fate was. Once the dog was removed from the family, what's the privacy issue?
I and many others remain underwhelmed by him.

Rottielover
March 13th, 2009, 08:55 PM
personally I prefer Ian dunbar's method of training, the only thing I agree with Ceasar with is exercise, discipline, affection. Honestly I have tried watching Brad's show, like Benmax, the guy is a total turn off ( training wise) for me.

cell
March 13th, 2009, 09:59 PM
That's one thing I never liked about brads show, never a follow up on the animal just a cut scene at the end about how the dog is now perfect... The show comes off as over edited which adds drama but takes away from what it is suppose to be about, dogs and their trainings/behaviors. I also don't like how whenever brad is with the dogs they do not look comfortable at all.
At least on Cesar's show they will show complete scenes without cutting in and out showing what is going on. If something happens it shows it, he gets bitten, a fight breaks out, etc.
Also if he does get bitten he says its his fault he provoked it by trying too much, attempting to do something at the wrong time or wasn't careful, where as when Brad provokes a dog its the dog's fault that it tries to bite him... hmm
I wish I could see the episode with Everest but season 2 on the website only starts at episode 14 and its episode 13 I think.
But I did see the episode with the aggressive Blue Heeler (Season 1 epi 7 on IMDB, epi 8 on the network site online video) which was dog aggressive and territorial and Brad brought his dog right into the yard with the dog, and the dog came towards his dog, he stood in between to block, which did nothing the dog started to just go between his legs so he slapped it in the face which did nothing, the dog still attacked his dog...obviously. So this dog charges and jumps on his dog which is on its turf and then you see him grab the dog by the collar, pull it about 20 feet while raised on its hind legs giving it a couple shakes, then sit it down take off his sunglasses and yell in its face "you do not do that to (dogs name) you want to get aggressive and violent ? " and a cut scene happens.
Completely setting the dog up for failure, he knew the dog would attack, I knew the dog would attack, the family knew the dog would attack.. and what happened it attacked, and it got smacked in the face, hauled around and yelled at in its face... hmm
Teaches people watching a good way to deal with their dog aggressive dog, let it attack and then choke, shake and yell at it... seems like adding fuel to the fire does it not?
If you try and deal with an animal while you are stressed yourself it'n not going to listen to you.

jakhi
March 14th, 2009, 09:52 PM
They ended up with a smaller dog, that the family could handle better.

I watched this episode, and while it wasn't really mentioned what happened to the dog it was hinted, IMO, that it was taken to a shelter. I agree that his way of handling it was off. I also think that the dog shoulnd't have stayed with that family.

However, I also disagree that he allowed them to get a puppy! A single mom, 2 kids under 10....who has time to potty train/kennel train/TRAIN at all!??? I think that brad should have suggested they rescue a dog that was already kennel trained, had basic manners, and was house trained.

Also, the idea that getting rid of a 'problem dog' and immediately getting a new puppy is ok appalls me. ESPECIALLY since brad always touts responsibility and that pets aren't disposable.

I think what should have happened was that Brad took that dog, saying what would be happening to it (shelter, PTS, rehabilitated/rehomed, ect), then he should have left them for a while to plan and think about what went wrong and do some research. Put a time stamp (ie, 3 months later) and helped them find an older calmer trained dog that would fit their family better. Then SHOW what happened to Everest! that would show people that someone else always has to deal with that dog that gets thrown away. Maybe even do a shelter tour or something.

I was just disappointed with that episode in general, honestly.

Bailey_
March 14th, 2009, 09:56 PM
I think there have been some good points made about that particular episode....but we have to remember...this is a tv show.

Brad Pattison has very little say about what is told and seen on the show. He does his thing, and the Slice Network Producers do theirs. They are the ones that make, edit, and have him narrate. I think these suggestions/comments should be directed to their website, because I do think that some valid points have been made.

downtowntrainer
March 14th, 2009, 10:28 PM
then he should have left them for a while to plan and think about what went wrong and do some research. Put a time stamp (ie, 3 months later) and helped them find an older calmer trained dog that would fit their family better. Then SHOW what happened to Everest! that would show people that someone else always has to deal with that dog that gets thrown away. Maybe even do a shelter tour or something.

I was just disappointed with that episode in general, honestly.

That's exactly what he did. Infact as I clearly remember he made the family wait 3 months and during that time he gave them a list of things to consider.

Everest was a shelter dog. The family did not want to go that route again for obvious reasons. Frankly I can't blame them. I have had similar experience with adopting. I picked a dog from a rescue (she was 3 yrs old) and it was not clear to me that she was dog aggressive. I brought her home, took her for a walk and she nearly pulled my arm off when she saw another dog and went after it. Let's just say that this issue was never brought to my attention when adopting her and the rescue was a "reputable" one. I called them and was told to bring her back. Well after some thought I decided that she really did not deserve to go back to those people and we worked through the issues. Now granted, I am a single woman and live on my own. Had I had children this would have been a different story. I would never put a child in danger of being bitten just because of my own ego.

That dog IMO should have never been in that family. Clearly the shelter did not do their work in matching the dog to the right family. This was a puppy, but personally I would be asking A LOT of questions (if I were the shelter) before adopting a large breed puppy with an unknown family lineage, to a single parent who works.

With the family's previous experience with shelter dogs, it was clearly not a route for them to go.

I think going with a small breed puppy was a much better idea. The family went breeder searching and found a breeder that was responsible. Having gone this route myself I can say that my experience was much better. All of my current dogs came from breeders.

jakhi
March 15th, 2009, 01:20 AM
I think there have been some good points made about that particular episode....but we have to remember...this is a tv show.

This is the most important part to me. It IS a TV show. A show that is specifically directed towards people with difficult animals. Because it is so public they should be setting a good example, showing the work that does go into it.

I work as a trainer and I can't tell you how many people come in with "I saw this on the dog whisperer...." or "I saw this on that show with the brad guy who trains dogs..." Or some variation of that. That is the issue I have. The show may say 'consult a behaviorist' but ultimately this show is about Brad/Caesar training animals. What they put out there is information for the public to use as they will. What they put out represents them and what they do, therefore they should be held responsible for what the show ultimately turn out to be. Regardless of the spin put on it by producers it represents them and each and every piece needs to be something they can stand behind.

As for the family not going for another shelter dog. There have been numerous episodes where Caesar has helped someone find a dog. Why couldn't brad have done the same? Why couldn't he have found a few dogs HE thought would be a good fit, and give them as suggestions/examples of the dog they should be looking for. I do not think that purchasing a puppy (who was from a BYB if anything, btw) was the right decision for a mom who was already overwhelmed.

Again, something I see everyday. mom comes in with 1+ kids in tow, usually young, sometimes with another on the way with her new puppy. She's exasperated, the kids are grabbing things off every shelf, and mums trying to keep the baby from pulling puppy's hair as the dog pees on the floor. I suggest training and they say "Sorry, i don't have time."
2-5 months later mum realizes she has a problem because the dog has no manners, and STILL isn't anywhere near potty trained. They come in, come to maybe one class then end up getting a refund because, surprise surprise, they ended up rehoming the dog. Usually due to 'allergies'. Right. I've seen it 1 too many times to be OK with that option for any mum with little kids.

Yes, in the right home it could work. In general you either end up with a dog with no manners in classes at 6-9 months who snaps at anything that moves because it hasn't been out of the house, let alone socialized. Or the dog is given up because mum has realized she doesn't have time to train/pay attention to yet another baby. This happens whether there are two parents or not, btw. I'm not picking on single mums at all.

IMHO the correct way to add a dog would be BEFORE there are kids. have the dog until it's approx 1-2 and has learned the basics, then plan for baby. I know that's not always possible, but the other option is waiting until the youngest child is old enough to understand that puppies aren't actually for yanking/tugging/or whacking on the head. *shrugs* It just seems to work out better for the families that plan this way. Again, just what I've noticed.

Bailey_
March 15th, 2009, 01:26 PM
I think that they DO a great job about setting an example for the time they have allotted and the points that they want to get across. Sure, maybe not everything we'd like to see is always shown, but again - tv show - on Slice Network for crying out loud. This is not National Geographic or Biography, we're talking about here.

I also have MANY clients that come to me saying : "I've been trying this thing that Ceaser does," or "I've been working on the same thing that Brad does," and yet when I have them explain to me how they're carrying these methods out - it's obvious that it's being done wrong. Not only because of the wrong body signals the owner is giving the dog while attempting to carry out a certain method, but because they have not previously consulted a proffessional. They have watched something they have seen on tv, and whether or not people want to believe it - the actual method carried out is not always explained in full detail to the viewers - therefore, how can we expect to know EXACTLY whats happening when we are not physically there, or previously instructed step-by-step?

I watch the Chop Shop on the Slice Network, but you don't see me attempting to cut hair do you? (And whoo boy, I would feel bad for my client if I did! :crazy:)

If someone carries out a training method they've seen on tv with bad results, then it is absolutley no ones fault but the owners. Both Ceaser and Brad make it clear that owners MUST consult a proffesional (as you pointed out) in order to correctly work with their dogs behavior.

I also highly disagree that the best time to get a dog is BEFORE children. (As a trainer, I'm not sure where you got that information?) Often times a dogs behavior can change for the worse when a new baby is introduced into a family; and if they do not consult for help previous to the childs arrival in the home - this can cause unneeded jealousy and a dog struggling to figure out pack heiarchy again, which obviously leads to a dangerous situation or a depressed/anxious dog that will act out in various ways.
I absolutley reccomend a dog to come AFTER all family members are in place in the home. If the dog comes before the baby, then it would be important to know how to carry out steps for the dog at the time the baby comes home.
And as a mother with a nine-month old baby and a five month old puppy (notice - dog came shortly after baby, yes I have my hands full haha) we have taught Kiley from the moment she was aware of the puppy to 'be gentle' and vice versa. I also believe that it's absolutley good for the dog to be tugged and touched all over its body, to desensitize any reaction from the dog in later years towards children. With that said, I do believe it's in the responsibility of the owners to ensure that their child also knows how to respect a dog and to treat it with kindness.

http://http://www.pets.ca/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=49400&stc=1&d=1237142062

BenMax
March 16th, 2009, 08:55 AM
I just have to say that I like Caeser's last message after an episode.

'Support your rescues and shelters, and don't forget to spay and neuter'. POWERFUL!!!!!

I have yet to hear anything so postive come from the 'other one'.

cell
March 16th, 2009, 12:20 PM
I just have to say that I like Caesar’s last message after an episode.
'Support your rescues and shelters, and don't forget to spay and neuter'. POWERFUL!!!!!
I have yet to hear anything so positive come from the 'other one'.

I agree whole heartedly. Caesar has done a lot of good for dogs and their people as much and the critics try and deny it. He is a huge advocate for spay/neuter and he states several times on many episodes the importance it plays in reducing sexual/hormonal aggression issues which is one of the big call in's for vets/behaviorists. He advocates shelters and rescues and insists to make a smart pet choice with your head not your heart, and if you can’t then find someone or somewhere who can make a good decision for you based on what you can provide.

I think the biggest reason and claim to the Dog Whisperer show popularity is not the things Caesar does physically, but what he says. He presents clearly the most obvious mistake people make that causes their dogs to be monsters. We anthropomorphize our dogs to a horrendous extent. For all the people who say that watching the show helps so much is not because they learned how to do a perfect correction, but the fact that they started treating their dog as what it is, a dog, not a baby, or a little person. to an extent the people who cannot achieve success with their dogs cannot separate this quality in their minds; their dog is their baby and not a dog. One of the worst cases of this was with the woman who loved her dog so much she would let it attack her son and then protect the dog for it instead of disciplining.
The main point of the show is that your dog is a dog, treat him like a dog, and give him what a dog NEEDS not what a person likes. He doesn’t say you can’t love your dog and have it as your baby just that you have to make sure to fulfill its needs as a dog first and then fulfill your needs as a human.


The Dog Whisperer always has a disclaimer to not try what you see on the show, I have watched At the End of my Leash off the full videos on the Slice site and never saw the same warning. Eventhough I do agree if people are dumb enough to try things on their own without getting training on it that is their own faul but still for legality sake they should announce not to try it.

BenMax
March 16th, 2009, 12:23 PM
Well stated Cell!:thumbs up

Bailey_
March 16th, 2009, 01:30 PM
:thumbs up I agree - Ceaser does a great job of representing the importance of being a stable OWNER for your dog - not it's "mother".

And I think essentially that's really important for all of us to take home...whether you believe in Brad or Ceaser or someone else, the importance to be the best leader you can be for your pet is what counts. :thumbs up

kitona
March 16th, 2009, 10:22 PM
What is wrong with "mothering" your dogs? My mother made sure I had good manners, made sure I aquired skills I needed to live a good healthy life, saw to it that I had recreational opportunities, supported anything I was interested in, provided love, shelter, good food, etc, etc. How is that different from raising a good dog? Dispariging motherhood is done by tiny little "men" who never grew up and feel the need to blame someone else for everything wrong in their lives. Yup, blame the women and slap the dogs into submission.

downtowntrainer
March 16th, 2009, 11:28 PM
What is wrong with "mothering" your dogs? My mother made sure I had good manners, made sure I aquired skills I needed to live a good healthy life, saw to it that I had recreational opportunities, supported anything I was interested in, provided love, shelter, good food, etc, etc. How is that different from raising a good dog? Dispariging motherhood is done by tiny little "men" who never grew up and feel the need to blame someone else for everything wrong in their lives. Yup, blame the women and slap the dogs into submission.


What wrong with it? Well you did not give birth to that dog.... that's what's wrong.

Have you ever read Adam's Task: Calling Animals by name by Vicki Hearne?

She was of the same opinion as Brad and she certainly was not a tiny man!

cell
March 16th, 2009, 11:28 PM
What is wrong with "mothering" your dogs? My mother made sure I had good manners, made sure I acquired skills I needed to live a good healthy life, saw to it that I had recreational opportunities, supported anything I was interested in, provided love, shelter, good food, etc, etc. How is that different from raising a good dog? Disparaging motherhood is done by tiny little "men" who never grew up and feel the need to blame someone else for everything wrong in their lives. Yup, blame the women and slap the dogs into submission.
We should not “mother” our dogs because dogs don't "mother" their puppies the way that human mothers "mother" their children.
Human beings have a different life history pattern, social structure, interactions, communication and care base. Also remember that the complete anatomy and brain structure between dogs and humans is wholly different. Human beings have highly advanced frontal brain lobe allowing us infinite capacity to think ahead, behind, problem solve and strategize. The development of this huge brain and its capacity produces a helpless offspring which is slow to develop physically and mentally. We typically produce one single offspring and provide it undivided care and attention, we incubate our offspring longer and are forced to carry them around constantly for around first 5 years of their lives because we have lost the hair, and they have lost they post natal strength to physically support themselves like our primate cousins. Also remember that it has not been for long in our evolution that we have been sedentary animals who establish a home range, we are still in the early evolutionary stages of branching from nomadic hunter gatherers.
Dogs produce a large litter of offspring who are also born defenceless but develop very quickly. They stem from pack based carnivores whose ancestors have a strict home base that is strictly patrolled. Their young are also born helpless but their defined territory allows the young to remain enclosed in a den site for the first weeks of their lives while they are provided the care they need to develop. The mother does not provide individual care and attention to each puppy she does not have aspirations for each individual, all the puppies are raised them as a group unit. In dogs and many other mammals the weak are commonly not encouraged but instead nature plays its course and the weak do not survive, sometimes poorly individuals are discouraged from survival at the benefit of the stronger, to construct the strongest pack unit, or in the case of dogs who live in a looser pack unit then wolf cousins simply the strong win out while the weak succumb. Mother dogs do not follow the care of their offspring after a certain point they are essentially cut loose to fend for themselves among the others and they have to find their place.
I have no idea how the conclusion was drawn that by saying to not mother dogs as if they were children has anything to do with the idea of “Disparaging motherhood is done by tiny little "men"” who “blame the women and slap the dogs into submission”. Remember for thousands of years dogs have lived beside men not with them as scavengers and hunting tools. It has only been the past few hundred years that people have begun incorporating dogs into the human family unit, it is a relatively new concept that we are still running trial and error with for the most part. Because for many years the knowledge of dog’s physiology was pretty dim people would try and “break” dogs similar to how horses use to be broken, using violence and physical overpowering, because they did not know how to overpower the mind.
Just providing a dog with food, water, housing, and activities does not necessarily make a balanced dog they require ongoing discipline and structure. You can’t just tell a dog what to do you have to show it they do not communicate in words they know you by how you smell and the projection you put forth of your own level of self confidence. I have no doubt in what Caesar says that animals of any species will follow the wisest, most confident and calm leader who can be entrusted to bring safety and tranquility to the family unit.
As much as we try to treat dogs like humans in hopes of getting back the human type affection we desire, they will still treat us in the only way they know how, which is like a dog.

pattymac
March 17th, 2009, 12:12 AM
Turid Rugaas (spelling?) also mentions in her book Calming Signals that we should be more like mothers to especially pups than trying to dominate and always show them who's boss.

Bailey_
March 17th, 2009, 09:33 AM
We should not “mother” our dogs because dogs don't "mother" their puppies the way that human mothers "mother" their children.
Human beings have a different life history pattern, social structure, interactions, communication and care base. Also remember that the complete anatomy and brain structure between dogs and humans is wholly different. Human beings have highly advanced frontal brain lobe allowing us infinite capacity to think ahead, behind, problem solve and strategize. The development of this huge brain and its capacity produces a helpless offspring which is slow to develop physically and mentally. We typically produce one single offspring and provide it undivided care and attention, we incubate our offspring longer and are forced to carry them around constantly for around first 5 years of their lives because we have lost the hair, and they have lost they post natal strength to physically support themselves like our primate cousins. Also remember that it has not been for long in our evolution that we have been sedentary animals who establish a home range, we are still in the early evolutionary stages of branching from nomadic hunter gatherers.
Dogs produce a large litter of offspring who are also born defenceless but develop very quickly. They stem from pack based carnivores whose ancestors have a strict home base that is strictly patrolled. Their young are also born helpless but their defined territory allows the young to remain enclosed in a den site for the first weeks of their lives while they are provided the care they need to develop. The mother does not provide individual care and attention to each puppy she does not have aspirations for each individual, all the puppies are raised them as a group unit. In dogs and many other mammals the weak are commonly not encouraged but instead nature plays its course and the weak do not survive, sometimes poorly individuals are discouraged from survival at the benefit of the stronger, to construct the strongest pack unit, or in the case of dogs who live in a looser pack unit then wolf cousins simply the strong win out while the weak succumb. Mother dogs do not follow the care of their offspring after a certain point they are essentially cut loose to fend for themselves among the others and they have to find their place.
I have no idea how the conclusion was drawn that by saying to not mother dogs as if they were children has anything to do with the idea of “Disparaging motherhood is done by tiny little "men"” who “blame the women and slap the dogs into submission”. Remember for thousands of years dogs have lived beside men not with them as scavengers and hunting tools. It has only been the past few hundred years that people have begun incorporating dogs into the human family unit, it is a relatively new concept that we are still running trial and error with for the most part. Because for many years the knowledge of dog’s physiology was pretty dim people would try and “break” dogs similar to how horses use to be broken, using violence and physical overpowering, because they did not know how to overpower the mind.
Just providing a dog with food, water, housing, and activities does not necessarily make a balanced dog they require ongoing discipline and structure. You can’t just tell a dog what to do you have to show it they do not communicate in words they know you by how you smell and the projection you put forth of your own level of self confidence. I have no doubt in what Caesar says that animals of any species will follow the wisest, most confident and calm leader who can be entrusted to bring safety and tranquility to the family unit.
As much as we try to treat dogs like humans in hopes of getting back the human type affection we desire, they will still treat us in the only way they know how, which is like a dog.

Exactly. Well said. :thumbs up

BenMax
March 17th, 2009, 09:49 AM
Exactly. Well said. :thumbs up

I agree. Well done.

Lynne_B
March 17th, 2009, 09:50 AM
Well said cell!

While some think of themselves as mothers or fathers to their dogs, I think of him more as my buddy. Yeah I give him food, and teach him manners, but he's my bud, not my son. I think that too many people out there "mother" too much. In that context I mean it as coddle and overprotect. Now not everyone does that of course, but there are a lot of owners out there that do, and humanize their dogs to the point that they are completely insecure in their natural environment, and don't know how to interact with their own species.

And how on earth did you make the leap from someone talking about mothering a dog to "Dispariging motherhood is done by tiny little "men" who never grew up and feel the need to blame someone else for everything wrong in their lives. Yup, blame the women and slap the dogs into submission." ?

First of all, no one here is disparaging motherhood to HUMANS, second, all men never grow up (sorry to all the guys couldn't resist that one), and the last? Give me a break you're insulting men everywhere with that one (maybe your mom's manners lessons are a little hard to remember right now). I may poke fun at guys for acting like kids sometimes, but maybe we could all use a dose of acting like a kid every once and a while.

maui_blue_eyes
March 18th, 2009, 12:19 PM
I found this on a group I belong to and thought it explained things very nicely. This is reposted with permission from the author, Charlotte Wagner.

----

First let me introduce myself: my name is Charlotte and I run a positive training academy which I started in Washington DC in 2006, and moved over seas to London. In my practice I conduct mainly behavior modification training, with a special interest in aggression rehabilitation; in addition I offer obedience, puppy training, and on occasion therapy dog and sport dog training (agility, rally obedience, and tracking for hunting dogs). I was raised in a household where aversive methods were the primary way of training and raising dogs, but despite this upbringing, had a very eager interest in positive and force free methods. I own a 3.5 year old Golden Retriever certified therapy dog (and CGC) named Riley, who I track with for hunting, and am starting agility with. I also own a 5 month old Toy Manchester Terrier named Asher, who is currently in obedience training, and will be competing in Agility and doing advertisements.

About positive training: it is not bribe training. Dogs that only come when they know you have a treat in hand, is not correct positive training, nor do you need to have treats on you in order to receive a consistent, reliable, and "obedient dog". I use the term "obedience" with caution, because a dog which does not respond to commands is not being "disobedient", "listening with one ear" or is not responding out of "spite", but is merely poorly trained or dependent on tools in order to respond. Keep n mind that when acquiring a dog, regardless of age or experience, you can only expect your dog to be a dog - and not more or less. If Fido comes into the home with a great disposition - wonderful! But he still needs training to be a well adjusted human companion, and it is the owner's responsibility to show the dog how to act in a human world, and how to adapt to living in the home environment.

This brings me to my next point: the use of aversives and other tools to train and raise your dog. Aversive tools range from shock collars, prong collars, citronella sprays, water bottles, choke chains, and head halters, to any other aid which may suppress a dog's behavior. Most dangerous tools in my opinion are shock collars and choke chains. The reason being they can cause short term and long term physical damage to your dog. Prong collars can also have physical consequences if used excessively but are less harmful if used correctly due to the evenly exerted pressure when applied. But, be cautious of trainers demonstrating on prong collars on you - your thigh or arm is not based off of the same tissue material as that of your dog's neck - I would love to see a trainer demonstrate a prong collar on a client's (human) neck. Prong collars do cause pain and are definitely not the best thing for training. Choke chains on the other hand, apply pressure to a single point, and in contrast have no limit to the amount of slip. Despite the fact that they may look less painful, they cause an even more detrimental damage to a dog's trachea. A more humane and considered acceptable choke action tool is a martingale / limited choke / or no slip collar. This tool is based on the same principle as the prong collar (limited choke, pressure all around) but does not have prongs on them: they are commonly made of nylon with a chain bit, or layered chain.

No matter what tool you may use, it is still best to use a regular leash with a flat collar or harness. The main concern (other than physical consequences) of using any other tool, is the suppression of behavior, which often resurfaces, and the breaking of the relationship between you and your dog. In addition, it is really difficult for the dog to understand a reprimand, and then being reinforced or praised when they display the correct behavior. Furthermore, tools do not teach a dog an alternative behavior, but merely teach them what to avoid *not even what not to do*.

I suggest looking further into positive reinforcement techniques: mainly clicker training and the use of Operant Conditioning and Classical Conditioning. These may seem like big terms, but they are simple principles tested, proven, and guaranteed by scientific study. Learning theory (how we / animals learn) is the most studied field in psychology, and I wish more people applied these humane and force free methods on their pets. Zoos, and other institutions use these methods to train a variety of animals, and I myself, have applied positive reinforcement training on dogs, horses, and cats.

Be cautious of punishment or "consequence" based training methods. They can cause harm to a dog, and worsen behavior. Also, you are not "teaching" the dog, or showing it alternative responses, nor are you guiding the dog - you are breaking an extraordinary relationship you could be sharing with your pet. Even if these methods have been successful, they put your dog under much undo stress.

I recommend checking out The Association of Pet Dog Trainers, International Association of Positive Dog Training, Dogwise.com for books and resources, as well as dogstardaily.com. All these resources can supply you with information, listings, and further help on positive dog training.

As for "dominant" or "alpha" based trainers / training who use intimidation and punishment techniques - I would be cautious of their principles. It is a trainers duty to study not only their own principles, but also those of other trainers in the field. I have read a vast variety of books from traditional German Hunting books, to whichever TV trainer's have published and everything in between - are these other trainers really educated? What do they _base_ their methods on? What is the legitimacy of their principles? Is there any legitimacy to their training? Remember, just because it make's sense, doesn't mean it's right.

On a last note - know that you cannot take the position of alpha, and the hierarchy amongst dogs is a much debated subject with sadly little proof in the domestic environment. Even wild and feril dogs only have a loosely structured hierarchy, that is not identical to that of the wolf. And although our domestic dog may be biologically related to the wolf, it is not identical in social contexts due to domestication. Remember that your dogs are not out to get you and their intentions are not to take over - they simply need guidance, to one degree or another, depending on their needs, and your expectations.



Best of luck to all of you, and I wish for you to have a long lasting enjoyful life with your canine companion.

Charlotte

maui_blue_eyes
March 18th, 2009, 12:20 PM
Charlotte also gave me permission to post this article.

----

The Effects of Aversion in Dog Training
By Charlotte Wagner

Throughout history, humans have reared, raised, and trained domesticated canines to aid in specific work-related tasks and provide companionship within the family. Dogs have been marketed as “man’s best friend” through television series such as Lassie, Rin Tin Tin and Homeward Bound, however, man has not always proven to be canine’s best friend. Regrettably, many inhumane and forceful techniques used to train the original hunting, herding, and service dog still exist in training today. Fortunately, the scientific study of learning has proven that the traditional use of force, aversive tools, and hierarchy-based methods is not longer necessary, and can have a detrimental effect on the dog’s mental health and overall well-being.

Physically punishing a dog who has displayed undesired (yet often natural) behavior can have detrimental consequences to the dog’s physical and psychological well- being. If the punishment itself is not correctly executed to extinguish the behavior after the first two to three trials, then there is serious danger for punishment to cause the escalation of extraordinary pain. World renowned clicker trainer Karen Pryor explains that: “the hideous thing about the escalation of punishment is that there is absolutely no end to it” (Pryor, 105). Punishment placed in the judgmental hands of the individual has the potential to reach severe and brutal force. In addition, the associations made during the time of physical discomfort can also contribute to psychological distress, which can lead to extreme behavioral problems. “Repeated or severe punishment has some very nasty side effects: fear, anger, resentment, resistance, even hate in the punished one and sometimes the punisher too” (Pryor, 106). In the best case scenario punishment does not teach a dog an alternative response, but evokes avoidance behaviors in order to dodge a correction. In most cases however, punishment worsens behavioral issues and can even conceal alternative behaviors. “generally, the more intense the aversive stimulus, the more the response will be suppressed” (Reid, 119).

In conjunction with using forceful punishment, pain-inflicting training tools such as choke chains, pinch collars, and shock collars can have further damaging effects on a dog’s disposition. One of the most common complications with using aversive tools is the incorrect association between the consequence of the behavior and the environmental circumstance in which it occurs. “Such 'training' aids lead the dog to associate pain with the object he is lunging or aggressing at - not a good start to the desensitization process!” (Dennison, 18). Unfortunately, owners use these tools when undesired behaviors such as jumping, barking, whining, and lunging occur, yet dogs do not associate these natural behaviors as incorrect; rather, they learn to react aggressively or fearfully towards their environment. Additionally, aversive tools can have physical ramifications, due to pressure and electronic shock during their use.

Along with using punishment, force, and aversive tools, many trainers, owners, and handlers opt to use dominance-based hierarchy techniques to train dogs. This method is merely a facade for using intimidation techniques, in which behaviors are suppressed by the human assuming an “alpha” role though punishment. Although in some cases there are immediate responses, assuming an “alpha” status in a domestic environment can cause suppression of both desired and threatening behaviors, which commonly resurface with greater intensity. “The whole dominance idea is so out of proportion that entire schools of training are based on the premise that if you can just exert adequate dominance over the dog, everything else falls into place. This is dangerous. Not only does it mean that incredible amounts of abuse are going to be perpetrated against any given dog...” (Donaldson, 19). Moreover, humans displaying dominance behaviors conflict with the human-canine bond “If you think your acting-out dog is the leader and you try to emulate his behavior in controlling him, what you are really doing is acting aggressively towards him. This way of thinking is not useful in trying to maintain a positive relationship or good training environment” (Dennison 22). Conflicting messages often occur when owners exhibit dominance during training without being anatomically equipped like a canine. Undesired behaviors are challenged when the owner punishes a behavior that is an absolutely natural ritualized display for the dog without teaching an alternative. “For instance a dog is punished for jumping up when greeting people faces a conflict because it is motivated to greet the person but expects punishment if it does” (Reid, 123). Since fear-based alpha methods require dominance-based techniques, they are also not safe for children to practice. Dominance trainer Jan Fennel confesses: “ Young children are clearly not going to be able to grasp the principles of my method instantly.”(Fennell 63). Since children are not capable of physically pushing, pulling or prodding dogs into a desired position, it is easier to show them how to lure a behavior using a reward, as commonly seen when teaching a dog to sit by lifting a treat.

The use of forceful punishment techniques, painful training tools, and hierarchy based dominance methods is no longer justifiable for training the working or companion dog today. Since the days of traditional dog training, there have been many advances in the scientific study of learning and animal behavior which prove that dogs are not out to get there owners, nor are they vindictive by nature. Psychological learning theory is the basis on which positive, non-aversive, motivational, and reward based training is built. Using positive reinforcement techniques allows people to establish a harmonious relationship in which the dog learns and the human teaches in an optimal, force-free, and pain -free environment. Jean Donaldson confirms that: “they don’t need to be promoted to intelligence or morality to merit fair treatment or places in our families.” Donaldson’s approach to training is researched and realistic in contrast to the hierarchy-based methods practiced by Fennel, who states that: “... my method cannot remove the aggressive tendencies of any dog... my methods will never be able to alter their potentially savage nature. What my methods can do is allow people to manage their dogs so that this aggressive instinct is never called upon” (Fennel, 06). Trainers, owners, and handler should consider giving back to their dogs, after they have been “man’s best friend” for decades. Luckily, the scientific study of animal behavior has made it possible for humans to continue bonding with their canines for centuries to come: “The prevailing winds, in fact, would make it our responsibility to have a clue about the basic needs of the species we are trying to live with as well as a clue about how to modify their behavior, with as little wear and tear on them as possible, so that they fit into our society without totally subjugating their nature” (Donaldson, 11).

Copyright Charlotte Wagner
1 October 2008


Works Cited
Dennison, Pamela. How to Right a Dog Gone Wrong. Loveland: Alpine, 2005.
Donaldson, Jean. Culture Clash. Berkley: James & Kenneth , 1996.
Fennell, Jan. The Practical Dog Listener. London: Harper Collins, 2002.
Pryor, Karen. Don't Shoot the Dog. New York: Bantam Books, 1984.
Reid, Pamela. Excel-Erated Learning. Berkeley: James & Kenneth, 1996.

Bailey_
March 18th, 2009, 12:29 PM
Physically punishing a dog who has displayed undesired (yet often natural) behavior can have detrimental consequences to the dog’s physical and psychological well- being. .

First of all, there is a HUGE difference between physically punishing (aka ABUSING) your dog - and innterupting the behavior through sound or movement - at all times, never touching or coming in contact with the dog. Behavioral training is NOT always about physically interacting with the dog itself, which is why when I read something like this - :laughing:. A trainer who is trying to advocate treat-training, by assumptions based on not being able to achieve the same result by taking food out of the picture.

If the punishment itself is not correctly executed to extinguish the behavior after the first two to three trials, then there is serious danger for punishment to cause the escalation of extraordinary pain. World renowned clicker trainer Karen Pryor explains that: “the hideous thing about the escalation of punishment is that there is absolutely no end to it” (Pryor, 105). Punishment placed in the judgmental hands of the individual has the potential to reach severe and brutal force. .

As a behavioral trainer myself, I would NEVER use severe or brutal force on my dog. The other behavioral trainers I know would also NEVER use any type of painful interaction to achieve their goal. This is such phooey, it makes me laugh.
Might I add that one of my clients recently put her dog in agility (where they are clicker-training the dogs through the course.) In this owners words:

"My dog becomes neurotic and aggressive towards the clicker and me. I was bitten twice. Even when I didn't click my clicker - she would hear the clicker across the room and lose focus on what I was doing."

Clicker training does not always work for every dog. The only thing I've ever said as a trainer is that if one method works for you - then great. If it doesn't? Seek something else. These articles are stripping apart a training method with lies, assumptions, and totally tear apart all the hard work we behavioral trainers have put into making our methods SAFE for every dog.

In conjunction with using forceful punishment, pain-inflicting training tools such as choke chains, pinch collars, and shock collars can have further damaging effects on a dog’s disposition. .

I have NEVER used these tools, nor do I reccomend them to anyone. Maybe this woman should talk to a behavioral trainer who believes that they are unneccessary tools, before implying that they are used by all behavioral trainers, hmm?

maui_blue_eyes
March 18th, 2009, 12:37 PM
Bailey,

This was not directed at you. I think you have explained your training methods and you sound like a great trainer. I just wanted people to read the article, as I thought it was well written.

maui_blue_eyes
March 18th, 2009, 12:38 PM
She is not impying that any group of trainers (behavioural trainers or whatever) uses these methods. She is simply saying why they should not be used.

maui_blue_eyes
March 18th, 2009, 12:41 PM
One more thing, she is not necessarily advocating treat training, but positive, reward based methods. Which we have already discussed can be anything the dog enjoys. So relax Bailey, it was not an attack on you, or your training. Just posted for people to read.