Spinoff: Is Dominance Really So Bad?

LOL, of course she's going to try to make CM look bad!  She's got her own stuff she's trying to sell.  Frankly, whether you agree with his work or not, he always looks like the bigger person. 

willowchow

Frankly, whether you agree with his work or not, he always looks like the bigger person.

Really got to agree here.

And ya know what? IMO, EVERY trainer is trying to sell something unless they are training for free. Business is always about looking like a better option than your competition...gives the public a lot of choice. Good thing!

willowchow

LOL, of course she's going to try to make CM look bad!  She's got her own stuff she's trying to sell.  Frankly, whether you agree with his work or not, he always looks like the bigger person. 

The link was posted because it included a lengthy discussion of Dr. Yin's perspective on the dominance issue, not because she mentions CM in it.  We all know that many of the trained behaviorists disagree with Millan and have no problem trying to dispel the myths that they feel he perpetuates.  However, I don't think it's personal, and, in fact, those of us who talk behavior with colleagues often debate ideas that we think don't make sense, no matter who they come from.  Most lay people (not saying that applies to people here)  just aren't that well acquainted with Coppinger, Dodman, Sternberg, and some of the more controversial people, so the tendency is to discuss the TV guys, IMO ad nauseum.  That's why I like to try to get people acquainted with other people's information, but I can't help it that the most detailed version of Dr. Yin's perspective that I found in my search had mention of CM in it. 

As to the issue of looking like the bigger person, I am not convinced.  Dispelling myths (even if it's only your perception that they are myths) is not equivalent to personal attack.  Dr. Yin doesn't say what a bad person CM is, she says what he does that she disagrees with and why she disagrees. 

I think it's too bad you had to make this about her few comments on CM - otherwise we might have been able to have a lively discussion of Dr. Yin's point of view, or an opposing view from another behaviorist, but instead, you chose to lead us down the same old path of discordant discourse.  A discussion of dominance shouldn't have to be about CM versus the world, and I'm done discussing CM on this thread.  Instead, I hope we can discuss the points Dr. Yin made about dominance, whether you want to take the pro or con, but if we can't make it about dominance as interpreted by various trainers and behaviorists then IMO we are OT.  

rwbeagles

willowchow

Frankly, whether you agree with his work or not, he always looks like the bigger person.

Really got to agree here.

And ya know what? IMO, EVERY trainer is trying to sell something unless they are training for free. Business is always about looking like a better option than your competition...gives the public a lot of choice. Good thing!

 CM is not really competition for most trainers though, as I'm not sure how him being on TV is really competing for clients with most trainers in the US.

And, he's forever saying how he's NOT a dog trainer so how can he be compared at all? 

spiritdogs

The link was posted because it included a lengthy discussion of Dr. Yin's perspective on the dominance issue, not because she mentions CM in it.

I'm sure that was not your intention 

Agree with everybody else, if a trainer in general is that good then their work will fall for it's own weight, no need to talk trash about someone else, unless that trainer needs to do that to get clients (which seems to be the trend)

I won't copy and paste here, but there are some good discussions going on over on the GSD board about "fight drive" - what it is, why it is necessary, how it is balanced with other drives.  In GSDs this is a component of having a dominant, confident dog.  There are several people in the discussion that have been working and training dogs for over 30 years.  Look at the threads on fight drive, prey work, age to start protection, box training, etc. http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=postlist&Board=16&page=1

The fight drive in general is something that is more and more lacking in the breed, mostly because a lot of people assume it's like uncontrolled aggression (like your pet trying to attack when you ask him to get off the couch, food aggression, severe dog aggression, etc) and because you can do flashy, correct routines with "prey monster" dogs, depending on the judge you don't need any real power or aggression to place very high.

This type of dominance definitely does have its place with certain dogs in certain contexts.  That is why I'm much more likely to examine this subject from the angle of people who have been working and training these dogs for decades rather than behaviorists who are usually called upon to help deal with dominance and drives in order to make them extinct in the dog.  The trainer/behaviorist I use for most of my training and I have some laughs about this because some of the things she teaches in class is the exact opposite of how Nikon is raised and trained.  For example when Nikon was in the puppy STAR class one of the test items was to remove an object from the dog or have him give it up.  At the time, Nikon was also being trained to guard and object and want to possess it and give it up for nothing.  Luckily for the test she used the same object for all the dogs and it was not the object of Nikon's obsession (the Gappay ball on a string).

I disagree, and I think the sheer amt of time many on the web spend trying to pick and discredit kinda goes against that logic. They should have confidence in themselves and their methods...but constant picking doesn't portray that...lestaways not to me.

I disagree, and I think the sheer amt of time many on the web spend trying to pick and discredit kinda goes against that logic. They should have confidence in themselves and their methods...but constant picking doesn't portray that...lestaways not to me.

Well, I can't blame some of them for having evolved to this point, having made great strides toward more humane treatment of dogs, and have a certain level of frustration that they feel we are going backward, not forward.  In any case, that isn't what this thread was supposed to be about. 

Thanks, Liesje, for wanting to have a rational discussion on the topic.  We don't always agree, but at least you are willing to engage in civil discussion on the topics, and I commend you for your level of interest in learning, and in examining each issue as it comes up.  Sorry this degenerated so quickly.  I'm not going to continue the discussion here, but feel free to PM or keep on chatting on the other thread.

Thanks, I guess I assumed the thread related to dominance and dominant behaviors and not really the methods of each trainer and behaviorist.  For example, I would totally disagree on how CM treats dominance, but not just because I disagree with his methods.  He seems to seek to squash the dominance and drive out of each dog he is working with which I think is wrong regardless of whether it's done by choking a dog with a thin string or using treats and toys.  My dog is routinely trained, encouraged, and rewarded for bringing dominance, power, and fight drive to his work and yet we have none of the problems that the people on the CM shows seem to have with their dog (my dog is under my control, he respects me and listens to me, he is trained in the house, he gets along with my other dogs).

I didn't read the original article b/c the link redirected me to a homepage and I wasn't sure what I was supposed to be seeing, so my posts are my reaction to only what you said/asked and not what was on that other person's site.  I'm not really sure how CM came into this discussion. I don't think he really knows anything constructive about dominance to be honest.  Considering how he labels the slightest bit of reactivity as "red zone aggression" and as far as I know has no actual experience working dogs in fight drive, I'm not sure what value he is to this type of thread but since it has come up, I've said my piece.

Liesje

He seems to seek to squash the dominance and drive out of each dog he is working with which I think is wrong regardless of whether it's done by choking a dog with a thin string or using treats and toys.  My dog is routinely trained, encouraged, and rewarded for bringing dominance, power, and fight drive to his work and yet we have none of the problems that the people on the CM shows seem to have with their dog (my dog is under my control, he respects me and listens to me, he is trained in the house, he gets along with my other dogs).

Well I couldn't agree more. While i use different terms it seems to me that there is still a thread of drive suppression rather than use and enhancement in so called positive training. While i am a positive trainer, the frustration of the dog is obvious. Obviously having poodles and not doing protection work, i am not that interested in fight drive, but again am aware of it.My dogs have an outlet for their drives and it is highly rewarding for them. I think the principal of using and channeling drive rather than suppresion is pretty scarey for many people.

My youngest dog is very very drivey. If i scaled it up many working dog people would lick their lips .))))

I have been doing some research lately. Again i don't want to fan hornets nest, but i think that using just food rewards for many dogs is slightly drive depressive, and encourages a work style that isn't for me. I use food heavily in the early stages but switch to play and prey rewards pretty quickly.

It appears that some play styles do encourage a different working style. It is not that suprising as two different areas of the brain are used.

Liesje, CM came into the discussion because Dr. Yin mentioned him (in a negative way) in her discussion on dominance.  Maybe if you search on her site, the article will come up.  It was a thoughtful one, and I didn't perceive CM as being the focal point of the article, there or here.  In any case, I appreciate your discussions on drive and how it relates to dominance, and agree with you that most cases of what he describes as "red zone aggression" are just reactivity.   I agree with you that his opinions probably don't relate to any discussion on working dogs in fight drive, because I doubt that he has even been an auditor during that kind of training, but I appreciate that he has opinions on the topic of dominance in general - not that I agree with them, but insofar as other trainers and behaviorists view the subject, his opinions fall somewhere on the general continuum of all of those.  I doubt that Dr. Yin has any experience working dogs in fight drive, but I suspect that she understands drives.  Her main focus, however, is probably on pet dogs that have issues, not so much on working dogs.

What you mentioned about your dog bringing drive to his work, but not being out of control at home is relevant and, I think, another indication of how fluid and contextual dominant behavior is.  While our dogs are dissimilar in a lot of ways, I recognize in my dog an intensity on livestock that she would not be likely to exhibit in her other pursuits.  At home, she is respectful and gets along with the other dogs, just as yours does.

I think the principal of using and channeling drive rather than suppresion is pretty scarey for many people.

My youngest dog is very very drivey. If i scaled it up many working dog people would lick their lips .))))

I have been doing some research lately. Again i don't want to fan hornets nest, but i think that using just food rewards for many dogs is slightly drive depressive, and encourages a work style that isn't for me. I use food heavily in the early stages but switch to play and prey rewards pretty quickly.

It appears that some play styles do encourage a different working style. It is not that suprising as two different areas of the brain are used.

I think you hit the nail on the head there.  And, you are not fanning a hornets nest, at least for me, because I do not support the use of food as a sole reinforcement for every dog.  In fact, lots of dogs find food much less reinforcing than other things.  My own drivey dog, Sequoyah, works for privileges (I get to herd the ______), or for frisbees or balls, and, while she also works for food, it isn't her preferred item.  Sioux wants the liver treats, and thinks balls are boring (she does, however, like sheep, and is perfectly willing to show off her drive then).  Training is all about figuring out what your particular dog finds reinforcing, no matter what kind of work you are training the dog to do;-)  My training style is very similar to yours, and food gets faded pretty quickly (although, just as with any behavior, I make sure to remember to reinforce it with a special treat or game or other reinforcement, periodically, so that it will not become weak or extinguish).

Anyway, back OT....

Found some more of Dr. Yin's stuff:

http://www.veterinarybehaviorclinic.com/downloads/DominanceFinal.pdf

Dominance Versus Unruly Behavior (article in APDT Chronicle): http://www.wilddogdesigns.org/portfolio%20images/print/MarApr09small.pdf

http://168.215.196.56:9005/c1_baker/library102736.pdf

 I know this is a tad off-topic, but poodleOwned, I am like you.  I used food to introduce a new behavior and then bring in the ball later on.  If I bring in the ball off the bat, the dog is out of control, out of his head with drive and takes longer to learn the new behavior. However there are a few behaviors I train with a ball from the get-go.  For example, when teaching the dog the formal front recall (front sit with his paws on my toes and his chin on my abdoment), I used food because in this case position/precision is important later on.  Once he "got it", I switched to the ball for speed and intensity.  Same with the right and left finishes.  Used food to lure the behavior and reward the position, now am using a ball because he understands it with one verbal command or hand signal and we want speed and flash.  I also use the dog's contextual thinking to my advantage - food training is done indoors.  There are certain outdoor fields were we always use a ball.  He sees the field and is already in drive because he knows the ball is coming out.  We go indoors and he is more calm and we can clicker train for fun, let him throw new behaviors without obsessing over the ball.  An example of using the ball from the get-go would be his retrieve.  I'm actually training it in two parts - the going out and retrieving, and the holding the object and outing.  The latter part, since it again requires more precision and finesse from the dog - will be clicker trained with food.  The first part we've begun using a ball in order for him to understand that his formal retrieve must *always* be FAST.  Also I broke it into two parts so I can reward with play without him getting obsessed over a dumbell.  So, right now we have it from heeling to the jump, sitting and waiting as I throw the ball, a fast intense retrieve of the ball and back over the jump, and he comes fast straight into me because he loves tug and the reward is that I grab the string and we tug.  As soon as I get a good dumbell we will train that piece using food and backchaining a bit.