choke collar = bad obedience class?

I, for one, hope you follow through and try clicker training.  It's a lot of fun, very effective, and preserves your relationship with the dog.  I am always struck by folks who think that you need force or coercion to train.  After all, if that were the case, how would anyone ever train the dolphins at Sea World?  You can't force an animal who outweighs you by hundreds of pounds.  My little Aussie is 8 months old and knows all the commands my older dogs do, lus she has a few tricks under her belt, and has never failed to come when called. The more I learn, the better I like clicker. 

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

billy

i looked at the site you linked to. the facility looked nice and clean. and the partial resume they listed for the head trainer looked commendable. since you have used them before and been happy with the results i would count that as a positive thing in their favor as well.

i couldnt find anywhere on there that it mentioned having to use choke collars in their classes (maybe i didnt look at the right place), but it does mention that they use praise and positive reinforcement.

 
Thank you very much for your input.
 
This is my 4th trainer (4 different dogs).  We have had the best results with him.  What part of that is the dog, what part of that is me and what part of that is the trainer, your guess is as good as mine.  He is also the most expensive trainer I have used.  Sometimes, perhaps price and quality are related.
 
At our very first class (no dogs) they gave us the equipment we would use.  This consisted of a lead, a choke collar and a treat apron.  I also see prong collars on the wall there, but have only seen one on a dog in his class.  That dog was a young pit bull who just didn't respond to collar corrections with a choke collar.  He wanted to play rather than work.  That did change with the prong.
 
I don't have the qualifications to verify whether or not they use "positive reinforcement."  Frankly, I am not exactly sure what that is.  The treats were mostly used to entice the dog to perform a command.  Heavy praise was used after the dog successfully performed the command.
 
Collar corrections were used if a dog refused a command AFTER he knew what it was.  For example, with Odie, he would sometime hesitate to "down."  Not always, but sometimes.  The trainer would have me step on his leash, in this circumstance, and compel him to down. 
 
Collar pops were used to teach a dog how to properly walk on a leash.  This was seldom necessary with Odie as he always pays attention to me when we are walking on a lead.  The trainer told us to alway be talking to the dog when he is following us on a lead.  "Let's go.  Good boy."  Things like that.  When you change directions, if the dog doesn't see it, you give him a collar pop and keep talking to him in the same voice.  "Let's go.  Good boy, Odie."
 
A collar correction would also be used if a dog moved from a commanded position before he was released.  For example, if the command was sit, the dog was expected to maintain his sit until released.  My trainer did not teach a "stay."  If you told the dog to sit, he was expected to sit and stay in sit until released.  If he moved from the sit, we were instructed to give him a collar pop and tell him "no."
 
Some people here have said that telling a dog "no" doesn't tell him what you want him to do.  While that may be true, based on my experience, it certainly seems to tell him what NOT to do.  If Odie tries to move from his sit and I tell him "NO," his black butt hits the ground.  If he is chasing the cat through the house and I tell him no, he stops and looks at me.  I assume my trainer wouldn't tell us to say "no" to our dog if he hadn't had success with it and so, I respectfully disagree with those here who say that it isn't effective.
 
Again, I appreciate your input as well as anyone else who might care to get involved in my hi-jacking of this thread.  []

Especially after working with horses, I am a firm believer that no one training method works for every animal.  Many proponents of Natural Horsemanship will tell you that it works with every horse, everytime, and if you don't use NH then you do not have a good relationship with your horse.  However, this is simply not so.  There are horses that this method works very well for, and there are horses who have been tried on this method and just learn better on more traditional methods.
 
 

Pro trainers - any reason you would advocate 2 hour training sessions with a choke chain as standard equipment for a beginner obedience class?

 
I don't advocate choke collars at all.  I would rather see a dog in a prong than in a choke - at least a prong releases when the dog does.
Two hours is like a life sentence to a puppy - they have short attention spans.  I don't even train that long with my adult dogs - I make training part of our everyday lives.  I hide treats all over the house and if I catch one of them doing something well, they are apt to get a click and a treat.  Regular sessions last about two minutes, and are spaced throughout the day.  My classes are one hour, but that includes a 15 minute playtime and, obviously, time for me to explain the exercises and take questions.
 
Any class that uses treats, but still uses collar corrections (by the way, it takes about 30-50 repetitions of an exercise before a dog really knows a behavior, so if you are correcting before that, you are really correcting a dog that doesn't get it), or forced compliance, is not a positive reinforcement class in the sense we mean it.  In fact, it is a bit of a "spin" that some traditional trainers, or combo trainers use so that they aren't labeled as force trainers to say that using treats mean they are +R.  I wish that people would a.) take puppies to class earlier, by the age of ten weeks, or actually socializing them, and b.) really learn what +R is all about.  There would be so many more dogs still in loving homes, and out of shelters, if that were the case.

I assume my trainer wouldn't tell us to say "no" to our dog if he hadn't had success with it

 
Probe, the word isn't important, and interrupting a behavior works - temporarily.  The problem I always have with "no" is that it doesn't teach the dog what you do want him to do instead. 

there are horses who have been tried on this method and just learn better on more traditional methods

 
Even "traditional" methods rely on trying to have the horse answer the subtlest aids.  So, one doesn't start with a curb bit, one might start with a snaffle.  And, in my experience the necessity for using a curb rests with riders with tactless hands, rather than horses - they aren't born with those hard mouths...

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

I assume my trainer wouldn't tell us to say "no" to our dog if he hadn't had success with it

Probe, the word isn't important, and interrupting a behavior works - temporarily.  The problem I always have with "no" is that it doesn't teach the dog what you do want him to do instead. 

 
I would tend to agree with that.  Sometimes I slip and do say "no," and though it MIGHT stop her for the moment, she just looks confused.  If I say "drop it" or "leave it" or "let's go" she has a better idea of what I want.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

there are horses who have been tried on this method and just learn better on more traditional methods

Even "traditional" methods rely on trying to have the horse answer the subtlest aids.  So, one doesn't start with a curb bit, one might start with a snaffle.  And, in my experience the necessity for using a curb rests with riders with tactless hands, rather than horses - they aren't born with those hard mouths...

 
That's correct.  However, keep in mind that NH is not all positive.  If your horse is walking over the top of you, NH dictates the you shake the lead of the rope halter, putting "pressure" on the horse to back off.  Now when he does, you immediately stop the shaking, but the shaking IS uncomfortable.  It is not a positive experience.  Most of NH is based on pressure/release.

I really have to say I'm learning a lot from these posts and I thank you all! I know Gracie will thank you lots! I do have 2 questions, what is NH and what is +R? I'm not familiar with these abbreviations.

NH=Natural Horsemanship

+R =  ositive (hence the + sign) Reinforcement

ORIGINAL: probe1957
I don't have the qualifications to verify whether or not they use "positive reinforcement."  Frankly, I am not exactly sure what that is.  The treats were mostly used to entice the dog to perform a command.  Heavy praise was used after the dog successfully performed the command.

my understanding of positive reinforcement is that there is never any corrections for not performing a command correctly or as desired (ie. "popping" the collar would be a correction). positive reinforcement would be asking for an action from your dog, say sit or whatever, and if they offer the behavior they get a reward, if not they get nothing. the way our trainer taught us, was to ask for a sit or whatever once and if wasnt offered by our dog then we said oops and turned away from our dog. of course this was after they had successfully learned the command, at first we would coax them into place and reward them for that.

hope all that makes sense. []

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

ORIGINAL: probe1957
I don't have the qualifications to verify whether or not they use "positive reinforcement."  Frankly, I am not exactly sure what that is.  The treats were mostly used to entice the dog to perform a command.  Heavy praise was used after the dog successfully performed the command.

my understanding of positive reinforcement is that there is never any corrections for not performing a command correctly or as desired (ie. "popping" the collar would be a correction). positive reinforcement would be asking for an action from your dog, say sit or whatever, and if they offer the behavior they get a reward, if not they get nothing. the way our trainer taught us, was to ask for a sit or whatever once and if wasnt offered by our dog then we said oops and turned away from our dog. of course this was after they had successfully learned the command, at first we would coax them into place and reward them for that.

hope all that makes sense. []

Made total sense.

But then if the dog isn't as interested in the reward as he/she is in whatever is distracting them from the command, then you just let him/her get away with not doing what you ask?

Welcome to the confusing language of dog training! It is actually much easier than it reads.
 
 
Here's a web page that explains it well...
http://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic]http://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic[/link]' target='_blank' title='[linkhttp://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic>http://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic]http://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic[/link]'>http://p073.ezboard.com/ffamilydogfrm17.showMessage?topicID=1439.topic
 


 
 
 
 

As for saying "No" when the dog is doing something wrong--- I  would agree that when the dog is, say, chasing the cat, telling them No doesn't really tell them what you want them to do instead. So saying Leave It might be a better alternative, however, if all you want them to do is to STOP chasing the cat, then No would tell them to stop chasing the cat. I And I think that if the dog breaks the sit, No, and then putting them back in place, is probably the best way to do it. I have learned that if the dog breaks the sit ( or down, or whatever) you're not supposed to tell them Sit again, you just say No and then put them back. It's kind of the same with them doing something the FIRST time you say it. If the dog does not Sit on the first command, they should get some sort of correction ( in my opinion) like placing them in the sit, so they learn that they are supposed to do it the first time you say it, not the second or third. This is, of course, after the dog has learned what Sit means. So if you are telling the dog again to Sit after they have broken their stay, it's like you are giving them a second chance to do what you told them to. And if you're trying to get immediate obedience from them ( that they will do what they are told the first time, without a lot of hesitance) you will only want to issue the command once.

And I have the same question that KaraAnn does--with positive reinforcement,like clicker training ( and I'm not saying it doesn't work) when the dog doesn't sit, the only negative thing that happens to them is that they miss out on a click or a treat? So if the dog doesn't really want to Sit when you tell them it's ok, they don't have to, but they just won't get a treat for it. I guess that is my understanding of it as well. I'll try to avoid the leash pops as much as I can, by getting the dog to respond right away ( and they get praise/treats whatever for doing a good job too) but if they don't, then I will, in one way or another, make them do it. If she doesn't do the automatic sit ( she knows that) when I stop, she'll get a leash pop to remind her she's supposed to sit. ( By the way, for that specific exercise-the automatic sit- I usually opt for a leash pop instead of the verbal word, because I want her to sit before I say it, and not wait for my command, as she's not supposed to get the command in the first place for that, once she has learned it)

  Sorry if this was very confusing...I'm just trying to get my ideas across while typing fast!