But you are a committed owner with a clue about what you are doing----not representative of the majority of owners.

Kids running in and out, people coming for coffee, watching TV ---all get in the way of training the dog.

Maybe not 'right' but that is what happens.

If you look back to my original post the attention for getting cross is what I mentioned----thats why you start the ignoring bit. That is when the really clever dog finds something that you can't possibly ignore. Even a trail lead and no eye contact and putting in a different area doesn't work for some.

I had a spaniel staying that I was trying to stop from jumping up and biting me when I was sitting down. In the end he would jump up and bite and then put himself in the playpen as I stood up!

Even the ignoring becomes attention.

rune

This is a key point and what we, as trainers etc, have to remember to take into account before advising a particular course of action to a client.

What WE may do or recommend in a perfect world may not, for various reasons, be possible for a client.

but isn't this why we adapt and put management measures alongside the training?

There's always a solution that doesn't involve physically correcting the dog

Again depends what you mean by "physically correcting"

Do I physically restrain a dog sometimes? Yes I do (as of course we ALL do if we keep a dog on a lead)

This is where, IME, a degree of expectation management needs to be retained.

Dogs HAVE to be physically restrained sometimes for their own and others safety including veterinarly treatment

They do not have to be hit, strangled, shocked, kicked etc.

If owners are used to using their voices to reprimand their dogs, children, partners etc, you cannot get them to change overnight.

If you take EVERYTHING that people have been used to doing AWAY from them, most cannot cope and they will NOT be receptive.

So you have to pick your battles, determine priorities, and enable owners to realise some "quick wins" in order that you can make them more amenable to adopting a more acceptable approach long term by demonstrating that your ideas work, but you HAVE to give them "specific, measurable, achievable, realistic" goals with timelines.

I have watched individuals give advice based on the best intentions but it has fallen on stony ground because SMART has been overlooked and no short term strategies have been put in place.

And many overlook the pressure put on clients by their families, neighbours and communities; it can be quite considerable so as in anything, sometimes behavioural modification (of both dogs and owners) not only has to be done but SEEN to be done.

I said "very few, if any, ever" - it would depend on the situation. My dog is now 10, and I can't recall using anything like this for a long long long time.
So to be clear, I have said I might use it, but it would not ever be my first port of call. When it has been used, it's been more like Brierley has described - said in a sing songy voice in fact.

I think the mind set is interesting here, in fact, because you ask how do I correct a dog? The simple answer is that I very rarely ever do!

Certainly not in a training situation - that's down to me, not the dog.

In behaviour situation - a last resort would be use of say, spray collar.

In an emergency - if it was the best/safest/quickest course of action, but then I think emergencies are different.

Not really. I used to with my other dogs, I used "modelling" (guiding with the hand) sometimes. Nowadays I teach by Lure and Reward and Shaping - so not really any hands on the dog.
I teach dogs to enjoy being handled, separately.

Clearly with an adolescent/youngster, this is where common sense is needed. If the dog runs off, use a long line and train for recall; if the dog jumps up, teach it not to (various methods, I use clicker); if the dog breaks Stays, teach it not to ... it's all in the training, for me.

No, I believe in setting dogs up for success, which is precisly why I don't "tell a dog off" as such. I never say "you bad dog" or use physical punishment means.

If a dog does something wrong, it either has no clue, or it's my fault for not watching or not instructing (such as, Sit and Wait).

If the dog breaks that, then it's my fault for not training it well enough and not proofing it etc.

Well, don't forget that plenty of us owners/trainers who used to use punishment (physical/verbal) as a matter of course, have altered our methods and as I've said, have found better understanding, control, etc

So that is expansion and an open mind to new and different methods. Altering from old methods. I think that is good, if it improves welfare, understanding, effectiveness, etc.

I think a lot of owners don't give boundaries and tend to nag and aren't consistent - but this is their problem, not a method problem, as such.

Don't forget that people who have "corrected" their dogs often end up with brown nosing, too scared to dare, dogs who end up having to be told everything, because they dare not put a paw out of line. Often you see them being punished unfairly, even for training mistakes made by the owner/handler. Control, but at what cost? Hmmm!

Not saying this is true of those who use occasional "corrections" as it's not. I do recognise that some dogs are ok with being told off and occasional "corrections" but my observations/experience over time are that there is no reason to train like this, when you can train using other methods and not using "corrections" as part of the training, as such.


I look outside at my neighbours, the ones I mentioned in a previous post, and they use similar methods to the ones you describe. Perhaps in kind, experienced hands, such methods are ok, but honestly I look at this confused ESS and just feel pretty sad. They use verbal corrections, constantly, little praise, and don't teach what they DO want. Talk about Mr and Mrs Inconsistent!

The above is one of many people/dog situations, and its' the reality, I feel, of teaching methods that use "correction" - because few people have the finesse to do this and actually be fair. It's a big, big bugbear of mine.

Most people, even trainers, are not very good with timing or consistency, and to train using "corrections" you have to have both. You also have to use plenty of rewards and understand about altering your "bad dog" to "clever lad" very fast as the dog's behaviour alters.

Most cannot do this - most continue to punish with their voice, even after the dog offers another bheaviour, and this is CRUCIAL to the dog understanding, but so often the dog is left floundering.
So I cannot in all conscience recommend this to my clients and I don't do it myself. Clearly this is muddled training, but I seen it all my life, and hate it.

I think this is the BIG difference between methods - clicker, lure and reward, whatever: all concentrate on teaching what is wanted. The dog becomes confident and "gets it".

This is what I so love about modern training

I probably agree with this actually, although we might disagree on the minutiae of the meaning.

Wys
x

I agree for the most part. Accustoming a dog to physical restraint, collar handling et is part of basic training, but, IMHO, should not be used in general training, rather as part of it (hope that makes sense).

I also agree that a softly, softly approach is often needed to convince owners that there are other ways to train, but, of course, that doesn't mean agreeing with what they are doing when they push/pull/shout, rather, as you say, setting realistic and easy goals that show just how much more success they can achieve by taking a different approach.

Going back to the original scenario - of course, if a puppy is already chewing wires, there's no option but to physically remove it from the danger in the first instance and then start to train.

I've usually found when the training situation is something like chewing wires, owners do manage to stop the behaviour quite quickly simply because they 'have to be' consistent as it is a life threatening behaviour. When it comes to something like raiding the bin, they have a far bigger problem because, of course, the situation isn't so urgent.

I think everyone is making good points re. "real life" and client ability. It is a good discussion.

People skills are very important here - and helping the client understand wny something is happening. I have found that if the client understands the "why" it can really help to give them the motivation to progress.

Of course, the occasional client is a nightmare and just will not give "client compliance" and this is when it gets tricky.

All professionals who work with clients have this problem. So I feel we all need to learn how to "counsel" to an extent.

Also, I find that giving a client one small easy thing to do (even a trick that helps to mend broken bonds) can help a lot to improve the mindset, which may start off being very negative if the problem is a difficult one.

The biggest problem might be influence of Tv these days!

Wys
x

I use positive methods to train my dogs and get annoyed when people correct their dogs because they have not trained them sufficiently.

However, we are all human and it is perfectly natural to correct our dogs at times. It just starts getting a bit politically correct to say one should not show displeasure verbally or physically remove a dog at any time.

I use environmental management for puppies or dogs to minimise the chances of the dog practising unacceptable behaviour and positive reinforcement to teach alternative acceptable behaviours. But I have not problem with a verbal reprimand to interrupt a dog doing something in my presence and if necessary physically moving a dog away.

Its all very well teaching a dog what you do want them to do but sometimes that does not help the dog to understand what you don't want it to do.

eg

One male dog house-trained by taking the dog to the garden each and every time it needs to do its business. Praise and/or reward plus environmental management to reduce opportunities for 'accidents' in the house. Same male dog has marked when visiting dogs are in the house. Watched the dog and interrupt with a verbal reprimand when it starts to mark. House-training now complete.

Also for puppies chewing inappropriate items. Environmental management for when unsupervised, teaching them they can chew on certain items using positive reinforcement is not always enough. The final step is to show displeasure at them chewing on stuff you don't want them to.

Don't they see positive doesn't mean permissive?

Yes, they do .

And done properly, it's not

I'm not sure who said anything about "physically removing a dog at any time" (have I missed it?). The discussion was more about do you physically "correct" and that means, as it stands, physically "punish" i.e. the dog probably ends up with a bit of a hangdog expression, tail between legs etc.

No reason a person can't handle, physically control etc their dog.

I do it all the time, and even as a game!
But not as a "correction".


Wys
x

One thing I've noticed during this thread, and it happens on similar threads on any forum, is that people who tend to criticise what they call "purely positive" don't always understand it. They have a vague idea but not the full understanding.

There is no such thing as "purely positive", and people who use rewards also use boundaries, consequences and in my experience have happy, obedient, well trained and nice to live with, dogs.

Those who use reward or positive methods also use "negative punishment" which is a consequence and part of OC.

A lot of the "badly behaved" dogs out there are simply not trained, by any method.

Wys
x