Very similar really.
I hated treating dogs "the Woodhouse way" and was searching for better methods.

I found John Fisher first and read his books, then via Dogs Today found out that various training organisations existed that I had previously not known about.

Went to some local good dog trainers, APDT people. Went on workshops/seminars etc and read lots - Dunbar, Gwen Bailey, Sheila Booth, James O Heare, Victoria Stilwell, Karen Overall, Nicole Wilde, Fogle, Abrantes, Jean Donaldson, Brenda Aloff, Terry Ryan, Pam Dennison, Sarah Fisher, etc. I think Dennison's book about "Idiots guide to positive dog training" is very good.

Learnt from local trainer and workshops about further training eg working trials training, etc. and now studying in a more serious manner/formally.

I have used punishment in the past, and have found I enjoy training more, as does the dog, and actually have more control, using reward based methods but with knowing how to give consequences if necessary.

"Positive doesn't mean permissive", is one of my mantras

However i do believe pet owners need to

a) be more into training and more dedicated

b) be willing to train to a more advanced level

A bit of a muddled post but hope it's of some contribution to the thread

Wys
x

I think this is such an important point and possibly the greatest misunderstanding from those who are against positive training and/or claim it doesn't work for them....ie. they think that positive training means you are too soft and will let the dog get away with anything.

But this is not the case. I believe in positive training, but my dogs do have to follow rules - e.g. mine do not go on the furniture and I can leave food on worktops etc. without them trying to steal it.

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.

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.

I have to confess to not having read loads of different training and behaviour books.
I've ordered the Turid Rugaas dogs pulling on lead book (thanks for the recommendation Ramble) and am looking forward to receiving this as I think her approach to dogs will suit me. However I also know their will be things she says i won't like, as I found out on another thread, TR probably wouldn't want my dog to carry on doing agility, so this is one area I'd ignore as I know Maggie loves it. No doubt there will be other things that won;t apply or I won't agree with but I'm still excited about what I can learn from her, and i can ultimately trust her because I know she won't use any methods that I deem harsh or forceful.

In the past I attended classes that used reward and complusion. If the dog did the behaviour asked for they were rewarded, if they didn't they were "made" to do it. This didn't sit well with me as I feel that I am teaching the dog nothing by forcing it to do what I ask (ie push it's rump down to get it to sit). For some this may work, I know for Maggie (collie x) she is too sensitive for this and she wouldn't understand.

I don't go to obedience classes anymore with Maggie but when we did we chose a totally positive class.
I think it was invaluable. I think if the traingin is fun and rewarding for both of you (and that doesn't mean alwasy using food) then you both learn quicker but also I think it helps with bonding with a new pup or dog. It certainly did with Maggie and I and she learnt to trust me and that good things came from me when we worked together.
Certainly if we had had an problem then our instructor would have been there to offer help and guidance in maybe a 1 to 1 session. She did however looked at each dog and worked out the best way to train that dog depending on what was of value and motivated it.

I think there is maybe less to be critical of with the positive trainers because they don't use force in their methods.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
could we not turn this into yet another CM thread!
There is already a thread dealing with it, isn`t there?
There are many many other trainers out there and I thought this thread was so we could find out about them.

I was very interested in Susan Garrett but can`t find any books, Mishflynn - any more links on training through play?

I think the pitfalls of positive training are people who think they understand it and dont take advice for problems
People who dont put the time in and if it dosent work in a short time chop and change methods and leave the dog confused
As wys said, people who think it is permissive - who think you have to be all nicey nicey and be soo careful not to hurt the dogs feeling by asking it to do too much. If I tell my dog to sit I expect him to sit - if he dosent I try and find out the reason but I still make sure he sits
Practise makes perfect and if you practise letting your dog ignore you then that is what they will learn, but I dont get angry thinking the dogs are challanging me I think either something is wrong with the way I have trained things or something is wrong with the dog

Also people missunderstand punishment - I do use punishment - or consiquences, if a dog is bugging me for attention then it dosent get any
If it pulls on the lead to go forwards then we stop moving


and sorry but anyone saying a dog is difficult breed or not into working with its owners
Clicker training works on big cats, elephants, killer whales, monkeys, rats - there are no downsides if you get it right

Whereas I believe (for example) punishing a dog for growling withouht trying to address the reason for the growling might work in some easy dogs, but not for the reasons the person is thinking, but in some other dogs you can be building up huge problems for the future with a dog that attacks without warning because it is not allowed to growl.


Yes I cherry pick from many different trainers, not because I think other ideas are wrong and dangerous but because some are just not relivent to what me and my dogs want to do and because there are so many great ideas out there that I do not have time to do them all
I havent seen a method by any of the trainers I mentiond that I could see causing a dog to become dangerous

I have wintessed dogs becoming dangerous when CM is training them
A big reason positive trainers would make for pretty rubbish TV is they dont goad the dog into a reaction so you would never see how bad the dog could have been

I will take my thoughts onto CM's training onto the CM thread because I would like this one to keep away from him

I think the idea of the thread was so that we could discuss the failings/dangers of other trainers / training methods....in the way that the failings/dangers of CM's approach are discussed

That's certainly what I had in mind and what I believe BenMcFuzzylugs obligingly tried to start up with this thread?

Everyone is coming up with "I like this about X, I like this about Y" - what DON'T you like about them?

That is a pitfall of ANY AND ALL training methods isn't it? If people don't understand it they'll do things the wrong way and can cause big problems.

So a big factor when deciding how good a training method is (for you) would be to assess how easy it is to understand. How easy it is to get it right and achieve good results?

But yes, in my opinion that's a good example of a 'negative' to using positive methods. Misunderstand it and you can run into problems - aggression problems in the case of my little dog. And interestingly, I did follow direct instructions rather than missunderstand. So perhaps the missunderstanding was the trainers rather than mine? Trainers won't always get it right and sometimes you need to keep challenging what you're told - no matter how popular a given approach seems to be.

I agree with much of what you have said, but would pick up on the point in bold. Yes chopping and changing without giving something a fair trial is wrong, but equally so is sticking to a method which clearly isn't working for the particular owner/dog combination, especially if it is seen to make things worse.

I am learning all the time with my dogs by watching their reactions to things that we do. I generally start out with the same approach to each of my dogs, but change this as I see how each dog reacts - they are all individuals afterall.

There are as many bad trainers as good and IMO any trainer who told you to carry on with what you were doing even though you reported that it was making matters worse, is not a good trainer. They should have assessed (1) whether you were applying the technique properly and (2) whether an alternative method would be more appropriate.

IMO negative and positive training can both go wrong if not applied correctly BUT the difference between them is that negative training is more likely to go wrong whether or not it is 'correctly' applied.

I realise that you've said that you applied the techniques correctly but perhaps this is not the case...in the example you gave about your pup giving submissive signals and you backing off - perhaps your style of approach was wrong in the first place...e.g. without meaning to you approached in what the dog perceived was a very threatening manner? Perhaps there were subtle differences in the signals which your dog was giving when he was 'taking the mickey' that you didn't spot?