|
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
|
|
Hi Mic,
I like Rob and often recommend the organisation he is with, however I wouldnt call him the "world's top behaviourist" as that is a heck of an accolade
- I'd reserve that for Dr Ian Dunbar and Karen Pryor and Jean Donaldson more maybe
In this country I think Anne Bussey is one of the best I've ever trained with (and who won the KCC TD last year and was 2nd this year?
)
Can you comment a bit more on the way you used the Koehler method? I know what it is, and if course he was a military trainer. I know some of what he recommended was pretty harsh, ie for a digging dog, fill a hole with water and hold the dog's head under the water
and also use of mainly negative reinforcement I recognise some do train this way although I would be concerned if the collar jerking was as in taking the dog's head off (which I used to do until i learnt better!
). It would be good if you could explain more.
I go on pretty much all the sites and there are good honest opinions on all of them - some more knowledgeable than others but that's to be expected. RE the agility, I'd agree with your criteria re. contacts etc etc, I think the problem re the dog's age was that it was suggested the dog was 10 months which probably would have been a tad too young. Once it was cleared up that the dog was in fact 14 months, I thought everyone was OK with that?
One thing I was not at all happy about was the 2 terriers being yanked back on headcollars -
whatever one's views on training, surely that is very
valid crirticism? There is no defence for that sort of thing at all in my book. Not because of differences in training ideas, but because using headcollars in that way can physically damage the dog's necks. Also one dog was yanked and had a bottle shaken at it when it simply turned around - and the owner was praised.
That is not good training, it's not personal, it's simple fact.
Re the bottle thing, many of those criticising Rob are concerned the bottle is going to be the next craze - this is very valid as many who work in behaviour see the negative side of this long after somebody has said "shake that bottle " . People do follow the programme as an educational programme, whether or not it is billed as entertainment.
T'other point is that you can very easily teach the Leave or Off with out shaking bottles or aversives. I've been involved with training such dogs and it's not at all hard. It works with very mouthy and pushy dogs as well. If you combine this with also teaching an alternative behaviour (ie Sit) you have solved the problem.
I agree with Rob in that owners do need to know how to be in control, but that comes with general training, setting boundaries, and the dog/owner relationship in my view
I also think Rob did assess the dog's concerned and knew those individuals would not be affected too adversely. I
do have a faith in his assessments although do not agree with his first choise of method.
I think it's very natural for the tv trainers to be defensive, I am sure I would be. However, I also think it's important that viewers can be honest as there is no point in kow towing to anyone just because they are on telly. You have to be true to yourself and your own beliefs at the end of the day or there is no point in having discussions, thank goodness, we are still allowed free speech
That saying "Put 3 trainers in a room together and the only thing they'd agree on is that the other 2 are wrong" is very true, isn't it