How would CM do it (Yeah, another one)

ORIGINAL: ron2

I did answer the question but no one wanted to reply to it. Not even the OP.

Yes you did Ron and you interrupted a perfectly good spat to do it.  Shame on you for replying sensibly to the original post when I was busy reading personal attacks and namecalling.  []

I didn't want to respond to the question because I don't have enough exposure to him or his methods to know how he would handle this.

We may not agree with his methods and they may not all be his own but he really is doing a service to my breed..no I'm not an advocate but I do appriciate what I am seeing regarding the positive image he is creating regarding the APBT. It is changing minds every where.

Jaime, that is the nicest and most constructive thing I've heard on this topic, ever, ever.  That's so encourgaing. 

No wonder they pay you the big bucks.  Oh wait. . . .

I have no interest in learning any more about CM than what I've read in discussion.  But, the discussion interests me because the man I consider my mentor would most likely make CM look like a Sea World dolphin trainer.  He's a sixty year old Scots shepherd who knows what a clicker is, but doesn't see the point. 

His method is a constant dance between communicating NO whatever it takes (short of actual abuse/injury) then letting the dog come up with its own YES.  Within two minutes of working with a dog, he will have the dog understanding that "NO" means "stop and think about it", and silence means approval..  Within five minutes the dog is so tuned to him that the slightest opposition has the dog confidently pausing and coming up with the right answer.

He talks a lot, believe it or not, about "taking the fear out" of a dog.  What he means is he wants a dog to be thinking calmly - dogs he trains, work to look for the approval he communicates with freedom.  They do not work to avoid aversives - they almost seem to welcome the (generally very subtle) aversives and cheerfully figure something else out. 

It's actually kind of eerie.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard a handler bring their dog in and say by way of introduction - "he doesn't like strangers" or "He's always hated Men with hats [Jack usually wears a ballcap or Scots-type beret]" or "He's scared to go in the corner after the sheep."

Almost always Jack has eyeballed the dog and noticed something even more basic - the dog has no confidence in his handler, is unsure of his place in life.  Jack walks around a bit with the dog on leash, possibly working on heeling, or just getting the dog's attention away from its owner.  Then he throws the leash away and continues to walk around with the dog relaxed and happy (I'm very familiar with dog expressions and there's no doubt about how the dog is reacting).

Jack says dogs are afraid because they don't know what you expect of them.  You aren't giving them clear signals.  That doesn't mean NILIF - he'd scorn that as much as the clicker - that just means getting in your dog's head and reacting the way they do - right at the moment - say NO if what's there is inappropriate, and leave it if it's ok.  Make what's wrong difficult with your opposition, then INSTANTLY leave the way clear for the dog to do right.  Make it easy. 

Jack hates all the talk of leadership, alpha, and domination as much as any clicker trainer I know - actually, I bet he hates it more since he's seen the extreme abuses all his life.  HIS mentor said in the 1930's, "If ye mus' beat a dog, it isna worth doin'."  He says, dogs don't know a leader from a hole in the sea.  They do know routine, and boundaries, and like to know where to look for those.  Those two things give them confidence in their social place.  You can instill the same thing through many reps of OC, but it takes a lot longer and depending on what you are dealing with, can have mixed results.  It's like taking an old bandaid off - it's gonna hurt - you can either peel it off really slow, or rip it right off.  The results are the same - the bandaid's off in either case - but while it might be a little uncomfortable to rip it off, taking it off slow usually leaves a little adhesive behind.

Here's a concrete example of what I'm trying to emulate.  If I want my dog to pause in the doorway and wait for permission, I  leave the door wide open and don't take his freedom away with countercommands.  The dog knows he made the wrong choice because every time he makes a dash for the door, it magically shuts in his face and he hears me say, AH AH.  I immediately open the door again.

If I see my dog blink, crouch a bit, look at me, flick his ears back, or stick his tongue out a bit (these are all appeasing signals), I know he "got it" - and next time, I'll take whatever he gives me, no matter how quick the pause.  If not, I'll repeat until I see that little sign that says, "OK, what do you want?"  Next time, I'll ask again and he'll come up with a bigger "give" - maybe just a longer pause - or most BCs and other biddable highly trainable breeds will probably come up with the right answer entirely the second time [] - in this case there's an instinctive feeling that busting the door is inappropriate, anyway.

Why train it this way when I could just train the dog to sit on command?

This is a very important skill for my sheepdogs.  They need to know how to check their impulse to just go amuse themselves when we are working in the field with sheep loose all around.  If I'm moving feed bunks, banding and vaccinating a lamb, or medicating the flock, I'm way too busy to worry about countercommands.  My dog needs to know what NOT to do.  That work at the door lays the groundwork for being able to walk around with sheep nearby (or geese or anything else temptimg).

My dogs have extremely intense prey drives but I can open the car door or the crate and there could be geese, sheep, squirrels, and cats all six feet away dancing the Bolero, and my six month old pup will stay without a command.

I had a youngster that I screwed up really bad trying to teach more positively.  She just got more and more frustrated and it was harder and harder to get her to mind the commands.  We didn't have a good relationship working, though she was my baby in the house and she was extremely well behaved as a companion.  Part of the problem was her breeding and a lot was my mistakes.  She has been retired from sheep work because she was getting downright dangerous. 

By contrast, as I said, the pup I've started training, having grasped at last the basics of my mentor's approach, can walk with me anywhere in my unfenced property with sheep milling all around, and he won't freelance.  But if I give him the word, he's at them like a shot.  His reserve is an answer he's come up after a good deal of constant input from me - it's not that he has less drive than my last pup - he's got MORE (he can catch flying songbirds out of the air).  He learned NO early, and I took the opportunity of every "oops" to teach him what I expected, rather than pondering how to keep him from doing that "oops" again.  I haven't got it perfect, but our relationship is as relaxed and happy as my relationship with Ann was "busy" and tense.

I've gone, in my journey, from a good deal of aversives, to as posistive as possible, and now I'm back somewhere in the middle, and yet I don't feel like I'm in between anywhere, but somewhere outside of the box.  Or I'm trying to get there.  I'm trying tto get where I'm not inside my head thinking about theories and wondering whether I'm positive or negative or what a favorite trainer would think of my actions.  I'm trying instead to emulate Jack and other wonderful trainers I know, who merely think the way a dog does and act simply, quickly, and allow the dog to think and feel free within the boundaries the dog and the trainer have come up with themselves.  I'm DEFINITELY not there or anywhere near there.  I now think I see the road I need to travel, though.  And if I trained in agility or any other dog sport I'd most certainly use all positive methods for that.  It would be as awkward training "unnatural" behaviors using aversives (housetraining is one of these unnatural behaviors), as it would be unsuitable to use the clicker to train for herding.

Arrrgh.  I feel like I've typed all this and just not really communicated anything.  What I'm trying to say, I think, is that this debate (R+ versus any use of aversives, which I'm assuming is what mainly bothers the anti-CM folks) troubles me a bit.  I feel like both camps are missing the boat somewhat.  I'm wondering whether we are getting caught up in labels and philosophy and mistaking THOSE for method, instead of getting our methods from the dogs themselves and saving the philosophy for after dinner adult beverages. . . .

 . . .just some late night musing.

By the way, my favorite training author is Patricia McConnell.  Just so you know where I'm coming from on the "theoretic" front.

Wow, I can see why Jack is someone you want to emulate. I think that's a totally legit way to train dogs, but not one you want to be encouraging people to try until they're super good at reading their dog. I can see it working well with herders, but I'm not so sure it would work well with a more independent breed. My next dog will be an akita, and I'm not at all confident that an akita would take to that method. I'm planning to use clicker training, but it took me a while to talk myself around to clicker training for the exact reasons you say Jack doesn't think much of it. I was like, why use a tool when my bond is such with my current dog that we're not using much in the way of corrections and getting things down pretty quickly anyway? But I'm not sure what to expect from an akita. I'm keen to see what I can do with one. []

It makes a lot of sense to train working herders like that, though.

You can respect someone's intimate knowledge without agreeing with everything they do, too. I remember when I was learning about cattle in high school the man that ran our school farm and looked after the cattle had been doing that type of thing forever. He was often gruff, abrupt, angry and belittling towards the kids, but I soon learnt that he was full of quiet wisdom he was ready to share if you only took the time to show interest. I soaked up every word he said, but looked away when he'd take a stick down to the cow acting up and endangering kids. He seemed to think that our way of halter training calves and steers by extreme gentleness and patience was fine, but if it was done incorrectly and produced a cow that wouldn't walk properly, or was mucking up on us, he'd pretty much beat it into submission. Not nice, but then, so much of what he said was and he obviously cared about the cattle.

Anyway, that's not to say that you shouldn't agree wholeheartedly with Jack, I was just ruminating. []

Yes, I should have said that as well.  I didn't mean that everyone should train like Jack, just that I felt there were people who didn't fit the labels and molds.  I've thought about what he does for years in terms of the OC model and just recently realized that's doing him an injustice - the key is his abilty to read the dog and communicate what he wants just at the time that the dog needs the input.  There's other trainers I know who use hardly any aversives at all - Skidboot's trainer comes to mind.  He seems to use a very freeform mixture of luring, pressure/release, and the most subtle of aversives (stopping a dog like that with WAIT is an aversive under some circumstances).  I think most really good trainers are like that.

The problem is, as someone mentioned, translating that skill to Joe Ol' Roy Buyer.  It's impossible.  They sit on the other end of the scale - they want a quick fix, don't care about theory or what their dog is thinking, and unfortunately they are not going to put  a lot of time and effort into any type of training.  And most dog people are like that.

One thing that CM seems to do, is it does show people that the basic problem with "bad" dogs is owners who don't put the time into their dogs.  That's a revolutionary way of thinking for most people, who think dogs emerge from the womb housetrained, well-mannered, and with the ability to amuse themselves alone in the backyard.  If CM gets people thinking "What am I doing wrong?" instead of "What is the dog doing wrong?" then he's done something worthwhile in my book, anyway.

Thanks Becca!
 But PLEASE tell me where are the big bucks???? LOL!
 
I loved your post, it was very interesting and enjoyable. Looking at training from a "working" dog owners stand point is definately different then the average pet or even obedience training we generally do. With your breed and work I'm sure you MUST depend on your dogs "thinking" and not just programed commands. They have a goal to reach in the command no matter how they acheive it, I assume.
 
 Your trainer is a man I would love to meet and work with, sounds like he can identify with many techniques and uses those that will work for each individual dog. What an example he must be setting in your dog community!! I'm sure he will be missed greatly when he is gone as well. Sounds like he has probably touch many a life and help the same in dogs.
 
Thanks for sharing your training experience and experiences!

If CM gets people thinking "What am I doing wrong?" instead of "What is the dog doing wrong?" then he's done something worthwhile in my book, anyway.

 
IMHO, this is the overall intention of the show. An "opening of the eyes" so-to-speak, that makes people think about THEIR own errors and how they have affected their beloved pet(s). The "show" is not intended (IMO) as a training show, but as a "wake up call" to those who are having problems providing what the dog needs. A stable, confident, and loving owner that understands their dogs.
 
 

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

What would have been wrong with taking the time to employ classical conditioning techniques instead?

I watched too, CM said that he will have to be next to the dog for a little bit so he could trust him and not to be afraid of coming out, so CM was laying down in the dirt with the dog  to show that it was ok to take him out, the dog didnt fight back and whe know that when dogs dont want to move is almost impossible to do it, i dont think he harm the dog by taking him out to continue the reabilitation

But i wanna learn more and would like to know how to use classical conditioning in this case? [] i feel that the dog was too nervous to react to food but i dont know, how would that work then? []

The reason the dog was too nervous to take food is that he was too close to the object of fear.  When you begin to condition the dog, you do so at a distance from the "scary thing" that is comfortable for the dog.  Then, you gradually work closer.  The problem with this is that it takes a long time to do, and most people don't have the patience for it.
Also, in addition to being confronted too closely by the "scary thing", that poor dog was also being confronted by a scary stranger.  Even if he was on her level, he is still unknown to her, and not a member of the household - it takes a while for some fearful dogs to build up trust in you.  He should have taken the scary thing away, and introduced himself to the dog gradually, perhaps by having the owner stand with him, and call the dog to both of them, rather than him trying to drag the dog toward himself alone.  She was clearly terrified and unable to escape, so she bit.  I would not have even taken the leash, I would have allowed the dog to approach me (and possibly my stinky handful of liverwurst, on her own terms at first - the old stick-your-hand-out-so the-dog-can-sniff routine is even too forward for some fearful dogs at first).
Actually, he did harm the dog, as he made himself untrustworthy.  This dog knows he will not protect her (what would a leader do?), and in fact, will do scary things.  That may work temporarily when the dog shuts down completely, but can resurface again. 
I hope that answers your question.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs
The reason the dog was too nervous to take food is that he was too close to the object of fear.  When you begin to condition the dog, you do so at a distance from the "scary thing" that is comfortable for the dog.  Then, you gradually work closer.  The problem with this is that it takes a long time to do, and most people don't have the patience for it.
Also, in addition to being confronted too closely by the "scary thing", that poor dog was also being confronted by a scary stranger.  Even if he was on her level, he is still unknown to her, and not a member of the household - it takes a while for some fearful dogs to build up trust in you.  He should have taken the scary thing away, and introduced himself to the dog gradually, perhaps by having the owner stand with him, and call the dog to both of them, rather than him trying to drag the dog toward himself alone.  She was clearly terrified and unable to escape, so she bit.  I would not have even taken the leash, I would have allowed the dog to approach me (and possibly my stinky handful of liverwurst, on her own terms at first - the old stick-your-hand-out-so the-dog-can-sniff routine is even too forward for some fearful dogs at first).
Actually, he did harm the dog, as he made himself untrustworthy.  This dog knows he will not protect her (what would a leader do?), and in fact, will do scary things.  That may work temporarily when the dog shuts down completely, but can resurface again. 
I hope that answers your question.

 
 
MMmm i think is not the same episode i was thinking of
 
I dont think that having the owner there would help, actually i think it will do more damage for 2 reasons, one because the owner is part of his "pack" and that would make him stronger, and 2 because the owner could experience feelings that would tell the dog is ok to have that behavior, think it was not CM scaring the dog but the owner by comforting the dog when he was having that behavior was nurturing that behavior, so the dog would be aggressive anyways
 
Well like i said, it was not the same episode that i was thinking about, could you be more specific? what was their goal? so i can really comment about that situation

Brookcove,
 
I think your post was great. It's difficult to try to explain this type of training to others that are not familiar with it. Instead of telling a dog what to do, we tell them what not to do and let them try their options. Your example of the dog waiting for permission to come through a doorway was good.
 
We train pointing dogs with similar results. For instance, these dogs need to learn  not to flush or chase birds. Many trainers use a whoa command to stop the dog the moment he sees or scents a bird. Whoa means stop, don't move your feet. I see this as basically shutting down a dogs mind. No options, no decisions no more thinking allowed.
 
We do it a bit differently. I never whoa the dog before he flushes a bird. If he wants to run in and flush it, that's fine. When it  flushes, I stop him with a checkcord. I then go to him and pet him for stopping. Before long, he stands with a beautiful point when he smells a bird. If a bird flies, He doesn't chase, he stops and waits for my release. We let him try his options and reward him when he chooses the one we want.