|
Location: Glasgow, UK
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 810
|
|
Originally Posted by
rune
Is it encumbant on the trainer to suggest every method (even if they don't agree with them) or is it the responsibility of the owner to look into different classes/methods?
I personally think it's up to the owner to look into different methods. One size doesn't fit all and a lot comes down to the strengths/weaknesses/nature of the dog in question AND the owner! Provided people don't insist that there way is the kind, safe approach that should always be used and will always work they aren't doing anything wrong.
But this thread is a spin off from a CM thread. On that thread people were objecting strongly to aspects of his methods and pointing out what they perceived to be shortcomings. Whilst much of it (in my opinion) was just childish bickering it is useful to see a critique of trainer's methods. Unfortunately we rarely see critiques of popular training approaches such us those taught in classes up and down the country.
Most people that use CM's methods probably cherry-pick too (that's what most seem to claim on here). But whereas on the CM thread people go to great lengths to explain in detail what they don't like about the bits they reject they only seem to talk about other trainers in a positive light. So for example "I use this, this and this from X trainer and that and that from Y trainer". This indicates that you don't agree with everything these trainers teach so it'd be nice to hear the negative stuff. The omissions, short-comings or plain dangerous stuff! Food for thought for those starting out
So, in with that in mind - Ramble you mentioned Turid Rugaas. I got her book on calming signals and ran into problems. At first I thought it was great - I learned that the lip licking, yawning etc were signs that my dog was uncomfortable. All well and good. So when my dog yawned, licked his lips, turned his head away I backed off and tried approaching him another way that he was more comfortable with. Before I knew it the little runt was using calming signals to get his own way. "Time for bed Biggles" ... biggles yawns and turns his head. No problem - we make going to bed fun. Problem solved. Then before you know it I'm jumping through hoops to make EVERYTHING fun so as to not stress my little hooligan. So I start insisting on some things. Biggles ups the anti and starts growling. Trainers keep advising to back off and not force the issue when a dog growls. Gradually little Biggles is taking over the house and becoming a complete brat!
I'm not blaming all of this on Turid Rugaas of course. I find the book useful as it's good to understand my dogs' body language. But you do have to be careful with some of this advice about not upsetting the dog.
My girl is fine and whilst standard training methods are wholly inadequate with her they don't cause problems. But the approach caused big problems with our little boy. He was resource guarding at 7 weeks. Our instinct was to be firm and let him know that it wasn't acceptable but all experts we spoke to strongly advised us against that and suggested that we don't confront the dog but also teach a leave command and teach him to 'swap' for something nicer. The problem escalated to include more and more things that our little dog would have a 'strop' over. By several months old he'd be showing the same body language and snapping when you told him to do something. Trainers kept insisting "just back off and find a way to get him to do what you want that he's happy with".
By almost a year old trainers started seeing what a little horror he could be. The solution that THEY used (despite always advising against it) was to be firm. Pretty much follow CM's advice. They explained that negative methods were sometimes needed, but they never taught this to dog owners as you had to be careful not to use punishment with a dog that would react badly to it.
Had we done that (i.e. be firm and lay down the law) when he was 7 weeks old (as most people that never go to training classes or consult trainers would have done) I'm pretty certain we'd have nipped things in the bud and never taught him to act up to get his own way.
Our little dog is a softy and being small it's never a real problem. He's not got an aggressive nature and he is just acting up. The metaphor that fits perfectly is the little follower that feels he needs to fill the shoes of pack leader because no one else is doing the job. The instant we reverted to CM's approach the problem stopped overnight and both of our dogs became calmer and more settled.
There ARE risks with all training methods if you misunderstand them, use them in the wrong circumstances or with the wrong dog. Just as people can get into trouble using CM's methods if they misinterpret them they can get into every bit as much trouble using rewards based methods....or any other method.
Originally Posted by wysiwyg
Not sure if I've got you right, but you are talking about obedience classes indoors and dogs not doing recall etc outdoors?
I'm talking about training the dog indoors, outdoors, gradually building up the level of distraction. As I've said, I see many labs (easy to train breeds) that completely ignore their owners as they repeatedly yell "sam, sam, sam, SAM, biscuits, biscuits, BISCUITS". They go to training classes but the most likely reason for the dog's failure to respond is simply that they've not put in enough work or they've made mistakes.
If it's that easy to get it wrong with a lab how on earth are people going to get the approach to work with independent breeds? Breeds that are genetically predisposed to ignore their owners and work independently? I personally find that training (i.e teaching tricks such as recall) doesn't cut it with our Beagles. The can appear to be incredibly well trained even with huge distractions. They'll ignore other dogs, we can call them off a scent. But I know that on a whim my dogs can decide just to ignore all of their training and when they do that you'd think they'd never had a day's training in their lives. It's typical of the breed.
A lot of CM's approaches (which don't focus on training) are more effective for us. He describes it as 'being the pack leader' - but that's just a metaphor to help people understand how to act, feel and behave around their dogs. I find that if I get my intent, body language, energy etc right the dogs almost read my mind and do what I want.
Training (teaching tricks) has it's place, but in my experience it's not enough to give you control of your dog.