register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Wysiwyg
Dogsey Veteran
Wysiwyg is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 10:22 AM
Originally Posted by Brierley View Post
As I see it, whether or not to join a group is a personal choice. In my experience, it brings little in the way of business, but does give the opportunity to discuss and share experiences of various aspects of training and behaviour with like-minded people all with similar, but yet varied approaches. Saves a lot of heated (and often point-scoring) debate
Yep agree, Brierley

The sharing of experiences and the support and even guidance of one's peers is incredibly important.

Even in one organisation, not everyone will agree on the minutiae and you may still get heated conversations, but overall, you know you are with people who share the same overall ethos.

Within that sphere, it is good to talk!



Wys
x
Reply With Quote
Wysiwyg
Dogsey Veteran
Wysiwyg is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 10:35 AM
Originally Posted by Lotsadogs View Post
...If I find my puppy tipping over the kitchen bin, then with a sharp "Hey, You" I can stop the puppy doing what it is doing and with most sensitive dogs discourage them from ever doing it again. Simple. Done. Dog no longer at risk from contents of bin. For life.
Lotsadogs, do you mind if I disagree a little here?

I'd say that you *might* achieve this. However, more than likely what you have achieved is a dog who won't tip up the bin when you are there.

But who is still very likely to do it when you are not there
(To be honest, I use child gates to prevent kitchen mayhem, as I find it easier than doing any training for this, as I can't help looking upon dogs as scavengers But if my dog is in the kitchen,she is trained to sit and be calm which may get her a reward).

I think that any well behaved, well mannered dog you encounter will at some stage have encountered some "negative association" based training at some point in its life, probably a few "A-HA"s or effective "no's" or perhaps they where trained by other dogs......... In which case they will commonly have been trained LARGELY by negative reenforcement. Because that is what dogs do when they train one another.

I am all for positive training methods, we teach clicker, hand feeding, lure, reward and toy and play based techniques both in classes and at home.

But there are some things that occur naturally that need to be stopped quickly (for the dogs benefit),
which are definately best "trained" with negative associations. Because if you don't want a dog to do it then you must make the dog not want to do it.
I sort of agree, but ya see although I can't see a problem with good dog trainers or owners doing this, most owners and even some dog trainers are simpy going to over use the applicatoin and it will become just another noise from them....

For nearly a decade, my neighbours have admired my dog training openly as my dog is very well trained by the car/garden/onlead etc. However even though they see this, and they have talked to me about it, they prefer to use "No! Ziggy NO! Ah, come here! Go there" ZIGGY!! Bad dog!" etc.

Ie total NON consistency and a confused dog, although she has somehow realised tis best to stay at the front door and not run out, although how she learnt that I have no idea, it took nearly a year.

I do get what you mean, but I think good timing, a FAIR owner etc is needed. Sadly neither of these are high on the list in reality....

Just honestly sharing thoughts. By the way, I have occasionally said "ahah" to my dog/s

However, honestly as they get older and mature and are considered "trained" there is no reason really why anyone would have to do anything other than use training/control to have an ultra obedient dog. As Dunbar always says, "Sit" can prevent a lot of problems!!

Wys
x
Reply With Quote
Wysiwyg
Dogsey Veteran
Wysiwyg is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,551
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 10:43 AM
Originally Posted by Lotsadogs View Post
I agree. Discussion among peers is hugely beneficial in most cases. The question is, do you want a discussion with a group of people who already have a pre ordained mindset, solution and answer to everything, or do you want a discussion with people who have open minds, very diverse views, and massively varied backgrounds? Chosign your discussion group, is hugely important to your personal development.
I agree to an extent
I am pro active about my own personal development, but also keep this outside of dog training/behaviour as well as inside it. IYSWIM.

Having been a harsh trainer, a la Babs Woodhouse, and having realised it's not right, effective or fair, I would not really choose to belong to any organisation that had very diverse views - you can gt that on dog forums

I'd rather read widely, (including the history of dog training, which is not always easy reading), listen to seminars, webinars, go to workshops etc but ultimately have my training/behaviour discussion group as ones I've chosen over many years of them all growing and evolving.

Brierley: If any organisation has built up a good reputation, then I don't find it worrying at all that people take it as a good starting point for looking for what they need.
Me neither, I can't see why it would be a problem - after all, it goes the other way as well - people using "bad" methods as their template of learning. Does this not concern you more?


However, I tended to find that when people look for a trainer they go on location, price and word of mouth recommendation or recommendation from their vet for someone local rather than someone who belonged to an association.
Yes, but is this good? Going on price? Location is understandable. Word of mouth - that's ok unless the person recommending is recommending the local yank and jerk trainer who alpha rolls dogs

I agree though that mostly owners do go on these things.





Wys
x
Reply With Quote
Ben Mcfuzzylugs
Dogsey Veteran
Ben Mcfuzzylugs is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,723
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 10:56 AM
Originally Posted by Lotsadogs View Post

2 Natural or genetically based behaviours. Barking, digging, rolling, eating poo, growling, snarling, resource guarding, scavanging, chasing, attacking, killing, biting, howling...

In my view the majority of the Unnatural behaviours NEED a positive association to train or perfect them. If I want my dog to twirl on command (an unnatural behaviour) then I need to provide a motivation to make the dog want to do it and repeat it.

In my view, the majority (though not all) of the naturally occuring behaviours are UNDESIRABLE and even dangerous in the pet dog. To cease these behaviours, it is often far more appropriate to provide a negative association. And that remember ,can be a very very mild, even barely perceivable, negative association.

If I find my puppy tipping over the kitchen bin, then with a sharp "Hey, You" I can stop the puppy doing what it is doing and with most sensitive dogs discourage them from ever doing it again. Simple. Done. Dog no longer at risk from contents of bin. For life.

I think that any well behaved, well mannered dog you encounter will at some stage have encountered some "negative association" based training at some point in its life, probably a few "A-HA"s or effective "no's" or perhaps they where trained by other dogs......... In which case they will commonly have been trained LARGELY by negative reenforcement. Because that is what dogs do when they train one another.

I am all for positive training methods, we teach clicker, hand feeding, lure, reward and toy and play based techniques both in classes and at home.

But there are some things that occur naturally that need to be stopped quickly (for the dogs benefit),
which are definately best "trained" with negative associations. Because if you don't want a dog to do it then you must make the dog not want to do it.
although I dont see a problem with the odd ah-haa or whatever I just use the challange of trying to train with none of those, because if I am trying to train people to train their dogs then really I should be training to a higher standard

It does require more thinking about how to stop something you dont like

I find a positive interuptor very useful for unwanted behaviours that have to be stopped now - so I use a kissy noise instead of Ah-haa - you cant make that sound angry - and all it means is drop everything and get over to me right now something fab is about to happen

Of course you have to spend time rewarding good behaviours too so they dont learn to do bad things to get your attention

teaching a solid 'leave it' is good too - but also rewarding while they are leaving it so you dont get a behaviour chain of them running back too it

you can also teach a default leave it to objects even when you are not there - I have posted kikopups youtube vid on that up a few times - and she has a great counter surfing video too

counter conditioning different responses is good too - every time Mia barks at the window I ask her to go into her crate (her fave trick cos she gets her dinner in there) its not a punishment - after a while it becomes a default - when she sees something she wants to bark at she runs into her crate to alert me instead

and of course managing the environment so they dont get to practise bad behaviours while you are not looking

My major problem with a ahh-haa is it may stop what they are doing at that moment in time but most often it hasnt actually taught the dog anything

It would be pretty stressfull to start a new job and the boss didnt tell you what he wanted you to do but just told you when you had done something he didnt want
Reply With Quote
JoedeeUK
Dogsey Veteran
JoedeeUK is offline  
Location: God's Own County
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 7,584
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 11:20 AM
Originally Posted by waggytail View Post
I regularly pick up a copy of one of the many Dog magazines available. I have noticed that increasingly these magazines appear to be filled with articles to promote "purely positive" training methods. a typical example is the recent issue of "Dog today" which has a 2 page spread from Victoria Stillwell on this subject.

My concern is that Dog training appears to be going from one extreme to another, Of course it is unacceptable for a dog to be beaten but is it really any better to excessively reward a dog to the overall detriment of their learning?

If the media continue to represent only one side of the debate then it will make it increasingly difficult for owners and trainers to have a balanced view on this issue. even organisations such as APDT are now taking this line, banning their members from using a number of techniques and products.

As a trainer and Behaviourist myself, I have seen both ends of the spectrum and I feel what is missing is a balanced approach. In order to teach fairly, surely dogs they need a mixture of both positive and negative consequences? I also feel that certain aspects of Dog psychology have been pushed aside to suit this new regime, Watch any pack of dogs and then ask yourself whether "leadership" is important or not.

I am interested to know what others feel about the representation of Dog training/trainers in the media? Have TV shows and magazines warped our sense of reality? is there now an increasing pressure on how we train our dogs? The methods we use, even the words we use (Don't say "Dominance!!")

As people are becoming more aware there are more questions being asked, more expectation of trainers and clubs and divided opinion on what is the right way to train a dog. I feel people have the right to learn from both sides of the camp but more importantly to find the acceptable middle ground.
I've been using these"modern"methods since 1964, when I & a friend had to find a way to train a GSD that had been to a"Dog Breaker"which meant that she was frightened of being touched. My friend after reading various books(including one by John Holmes)came up with the suggestion of a flat collar & treats(when the norm was a choker & force)

Since then I have used the same basic way of training my dogs(tweaking when needed)& never need to resort to the negative(punishment)methods of certain "famous"trainers/behaviourizts.

Sadly the so called "balanced"approach requires the use of corrective punishment(mental or physical)using the misguided belief that in a domestic "dog pack"there needs to a a leader(AKA Alpha), in reality unless all the dogs that live in a household group that is closely related(parents/mother & offspring)they do not comprise a pack & any "leadership"will be subject to change as the members of the group change, in a pack(as in wolf/wild dog)the "leaders" are the parents & when they die the pack breaks up meaning there is never any change in leadership in a pack.
Reply With Quote
Chris
Dogsey Veteran
Chris is offline  
Location: Lincolnshire
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,584
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 11:22 AM
Originally Posted by Wysiwyg View Post
Yes, but is this good? Going on price? Location is understandable. Word of mouth - that's ok unless the person recommending is recommending the local yank and jerk trainer who alpha rolls dogs

I agree though that mostly owners do go on these things.

Wys
x
There's no substitute for research, but in the real world a great many owners find price and location to be the main considerations.

Of course, in high unemployment/low income areas it is a vital consideration for many. Unfortunately, it's usually these areas where choice of trainer is limited
Reply With Quote
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 12:39 PM
Originally Posted by Wysiwyg View Post




Why?
Were they wanting to use aversives, (in which case why were they members?) or was it more of a personality clash situation?

Well in one particular case it was using a gundog slip lead! I am sure you remember the individual in question; a great great loss.


I do hope they are not overly arrogant, though! I think to be a good trainer, one does need to keep some ability to be humble. One never knows everything, and one keeps learning ...

A very good example of exactly what I was referring to in my original post!

Surely the above observations apply equally to dog trainers WITHIN the APDT
.


It's hard for dog owners to know who to go to, this is the problem. Yes someone can be non APDT, but is that person going to use harsh methods or even use p.punishment where it is not necessary. Are they going to be up to date with behaviour?

Why not, the APDT do not hold the monopoly on kind, effective and fair methods, neither are they the only people who are committed to CPD.

What about KCAI who do not belong to the APDT?

THEY have to commit to a Code of Practice and CPD?


Personally I believe that an ongoing education, theory and practical experience is the way to go. The more one is educated, the less one is likely to want to (or have to) use spray collars, shocks, lead jerks etc on pet dogs.

Wys
x

And all of the above is applicable to ALL dog trainers, whatever organisation they belong to or if they belong to none.
Reply With Quote
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 12:41 PM
Originally Posted by sarah1983 View Post
In all honesty I think most of us who use positive methods also use SOME sort of aversive if it's really necessary. However, we look for behaviour to reward rather than behaviour to punish AND we set our dogs up to succeed so aversives tend to be few and far between.

I've run across people who think positive training means you never say no to your dog, you never set boundaries and have to allow the dog to do whatever it wants whenever it wants. That can be a problem.
Very well said; life is full of aversives, and titbits aint going to break up a dog fight!
Reply With Quote
Lotsadogs
Dogsey Senior
Lotsadogs is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 709
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 12:43 PM
Originally Posted by Wysiwyg View Post
Lotsadogs, do you mind if I disagree a little here?

I'd say that you *might* achieve this. However, more than likely what you have achieved is a dog who won't tip up the bin when you are there.

But who is still very likely to do it when you are not there
You can disagree all you like Wys I have to answer your post in bits as I have yet to learn to multiquote.

So how come all the dogs that I have owned (except the rescue who has not long been with me) do longer raid the bin? Luck do you think? Coincidence perhaps? I think the proof of any method lies in its results! And the happiness of the dog.

Next bit coming up. Denise Mcleod
Reply With Quote
Lotsadogs
Dogsey Senior
Lotsadogs is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 709
Female 
 
27-07-2011, 12:47 PM
Originally Posted by Wysiwyg View Post
(To be honest, I use child gates to prevent kitchen mayhem, as I find it easier than doing any training for this, as I can't help looking upon dogs as scavengers But if my dog is in the kitchen,she is trained to sit and be calm which may get her a reward).



I sort of agree, but ya see although I can't see a problem with good dog trainers or owners doing this, most owners and even some dog trainers are simpy going to over use the applicatoin and it will become just another noise from them....

For nearly a decade, my neighbours have admired my dog training openly as my dog is very well trained by the car/garden/onlead etc. However even though they see this, and they have talked to me about it, they prefer to use "No! Ziggy NO! Ah, come here! Go there" ZIGGY!! Bad dog!" etc.

Ie total NON consistency and a confused dog, although she has somehow realised tis best to stay at the front door and not run out, although how she learnt that I have no idea, it took nearly a year.

I do get what you mean, but I think good timing, a FAIR owner etc is needed. Sadly neither of these are high on the list in reality....

Just honestly sharing thoughts. By the way, I have occasionally said "ahah" to my dog/s

However, honestly as they get older and mature and are considered "trained" there is no reason really why anyone would have to do anything other than use training/control to have an ultra obedient dog. As Dunbar always says, "Sit" can prevent a lot of problems!!

Wys
x
I see, you chose to use physical barriers to create desired behaviour. Brilliant, Well done. But for me it works with a simple well timed harmless intervention.

What you are talking about here I think is how successfull any method is with respect to the most important factor. The trainer. Any method can succeed or fail according to the owner. I did not think that that was the subject of this thread though.

I agree good trainers are better than bad ones! There ya go we agree! Denise Mcleod
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 4 of 21 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top