Dog-dolphin analogy

I find it very interesting, if this is the same person, that she advertises herself as a "force free" trainer, since that system uses electronic collars: http://www.seespotrunkennel.com/crisler.html

She spouts the same gobbledygook as all the rest of the force trainers, who have now figured out that they need to couch those terms in something the public will accept.  If their method is so innocuous, why do they have to camouflage it?

I dont think she advertises herself as "force free" only. She has a certificate, that does not mean she only does that:

"She believes that different dogs require different approaches, and that the best tools a trainer can posess are experience and an open mind."

spiritdogs

She spouts the same gobbledygook

"Gobbledygook or gobbledegook (sometimes gobbledegoo, gobbledeegook^[1] or other forms^[2]) is any text containing jargon or especially convoluted English that results in it being excessively hard to understand or even incomprehensible."

Feel free to ask if there is something you dont understand

To me, a leash on a dog and no leash on a dolphin is a superfluous difference. The stronger point is that both are mammals and mammals learn along similar paths. That's why Pryor's dolphin training also works on dogs, as has been proven for quite some time, now.

 I think there is another thing that should be kept in mind when we compare dolphin to dog training:  we ask a lot more of our dogs than a dolphin.  Most dolphins are trained basic fun tricks to entertain people.  Our dogs, on the other hand, are 'required' to be almost human -- since we want them in our homes they are required to learn, not only fun tricks, but rules and regulations that, quite frankly, a lot of dogs don't quite see the point.  We ask our dogs to learn things that, in many cases, go totally against their natural instinct -- dolphins are trained to do things that they would usually do in the wild, but now 'on-command'.  Many of us do have dogs that really want to please (I've had many myself) -- and that makes many of us think we are natural-born trainers -- but put a really stubborn dog in front of many of these so-called trainers and suddenly they have a myriad of excuses (its never their training methods, but always the dog's upbringing: from poor breeding to nutty owners, or whatever!).  I think every dog is unique -- just like people -- one size does not fit all when it comes to training; some only need a gentle coaxing to get it, while others will 'fight you all the way' if he thinks he will get his way....just like kids.  I also think being in a captive environment has much to do with it -- ever notice how great the dog does on his positive-reinforcement training when he's in the house -- take him outside in the real world and suddenly he's got either amnesia or selective hearing.  :-) 

 My dog who competes in Rally-O and has achieved perfect scores in the past (and is at a level that most in her breed never make it to) would disagree about the amnesia. She has *very* rarely been corrected, and not ever for the behaviors she uses in the ring. She will finish her RAE and her CD this year, on positive training. She goes everywhere with me (literally). She is welcome in hardware stores, banks, clothing stores, and she goes to work with me. She is extremely well behaved, and has only ever "forgotten" her training under extreme stress. It's just anectdotal, but I know she's not the only one. I'm a novice trainer, with 2 dogs I've competed with, and 1 I'm bringing up to compete (adopted her at 8). If I can do it without being harsh, I'm sure it's not that hard.

While I love the dolphin analogy, I prefer to look at ABE (Animal Behaviour Enterprises) who was able to teach thousands of animals (birds, whales in the ocean, cats, etc) to perform real-world activities without the use of punishment. Bob Bailey (and the Brelands) were keys in all of this, and Bob himself (as I have spoken to him before) has said that he can count on one set of hands how many times he had to use punishments to "get a behavior". And he went on to say that some of them were only because of the extreme risks involved that he felt the punishment was warranted (war dogs to be precise in terms of dogs).

Because we aren't all raising war dogs, if he can do it for all those other species, in real-time, in the real-world, and to do really complicated things, I think we can do it with our family pets that we don't expect nearly as much of as they did at ABE.

Have I punished my dogs? I have used a few cases of P+. But to be honest, they occurred at a time when I could not come up with a solution on my own, did not have the right tools, and did not know what else to do. To be honest I consider the need to use a punishment a failure on my own behalf, and a sign I need to look further to learn. Some of those things I punished for in the past, I now have other ways to teach it and do not use positive punishment. I will still use some negative punishment (like time-outs and removing the possibility of rewards) and I will use interrupters in specific circumstances (things that will get an animal's attention in dire need but that don't really affect future behaviour in any way).

I work with a breed (and have fostered others in the same personality area) that is rather independent, and that don't take well to punishment. You really can't use punishments to get your way with them, or they will totally lose all respect for you, will fight back, or will simply shut down and stop listening.  To call a dog labels - dominant, stubborn, lazy, hard-headed - is just an excuse because the trainer can not find a way to motivate that dog (usually cannot find a way to punish the dog into behaving, in reality) to do what the trainer wants. It's long past time that labels get thrown out.

The development and popularization of reward-based teaching is specifically why more and more non-traditional breeds are showing up in dog performance sports and in classes, more are getting their CGC's and more are becoming therapy dogs. It is not because they were 'stubborn' or 'independent' or 'stupid' that they once were rare to see, it is because those breeds are not prone to working well with positive punishment (aka corrections) and trainers didn't know how to teach them; and once the dogs learned to work through the motivation of things the dog liked, rather than trying to use a lot of negative reinforcement or punishment, training suddenly became a breeze!!

blujeans

 I think there is another thing that should be kept in mind when we compare dolphin to dog training:  we ask a lot more of our dogs than a dolphin.  Most dolphins are trained basic fun tricks to entertain people.  Our dogs, on the other hand, are 'required' to be almost human -- since we want them in our homes they are required to learn, not only fun tricks, but rules and regulations that, quite frankly, a lot of dogs don't quite see the point.  We ask our dogs to learn things that, in many cases, go totally against their natural instinct -- dolphins are trained to do things that they would usually do in the wild, but now 'on-command'.  Many of us do have dogs that really want to please (I've had many myself) -- and that makes many of us think we are natural-born trainers -- but put a really stubborn dog in front of many of these so-called trainers and suddenly they have a myriad of excuses (its never their training methods, but always the dog's upbringing: from poor breeding to nutty owners, or whatever!).  I think every dog is unique -- just like people -- one size does not fit all when it comes to training; some only need a gentle coaxing to get it, while others will 'fight you all the way' if he thinks he will get his way....just like kids.  I also think being in a captive environment has much to do with it -- ever notice how great the dog does on his positive-reinforcement training when he's in the house -- take him outside in the real world and suddenly he's got either amnesia or selective hearing.  :-) 

I think that so called "stubborn" dogs are only difficult because the trainer is thinking of them as stubborn, rather than thinking of how to motivate a dog that may not be motivated by the same reinforcements that the dogs who really want to please are (we call those dogs "biddable";).  With regard to the dogs that behave in the house and not in the real world, that's just a failure on the part of the trainer to train in ever increasingly distracting environments, and to build distance and duration into the behaviors the dog knows, and not because the dog has "selective hearing", although certainly, during adolescence, some dogs are inclined to be a bit forgetful about following cues (like the human adolescent, probably their brains are being bathed in hormones lol).  One size may not fit all, but that's often just an excuse to continue punishment techniques that are not necessary.  Not saying you are doing that, but it's an often used phrase to justify intransigence.

blujeans

 I think there is another thing that should be kept in mind when we compare dolphin to dog training:  we ask a lot more of our dogs than a dolphin.  Most dolphins are trained basic fun tricks to entertain people.  Our dogs, on the other hand, are 'required' to be almost human -- since we want them in our homes they are required to learn, not only fun tricks, but rules and regulations that, quite frankly, a lot of dogs don't quite see the point.  We ask our dogs to learn things that, in many cases, go totally against their natural instinct -- dolphins are trained to do things that they would usually do in the wild, but now 'on-command'.  Many of us do have dogs that really want to please (I've had many myself) -- and that makes many of us think we are natural-born trainers -- but put a really stubborn dog in front of many of these so-called trainers and suddenly they have a myriad of excuses (its never their training methods, but always the dog's upbringing: from poor breeding to nutty owners, or whatever!).  I think every dog is unique -- just like people -- one size does not fit all when it comes to training; some only need a gentle coaxing to get it, while others will 'fight you all the way' if he thinks he will get his way....just like kids.  I also think being in a captive environment has much to do with it -- ever notice how great the dog does on his positive-reinforcement training when he's in the house -- take him outside in the real world and suddenly he's got either amnesia or selective hearing.  :-) 

  Well said, thats exactly what the article talks about

"Speaking only for myself, such tips strike me as potentially less relevant to the average parent, than to the average child-abductor, who having imprisoned his catch in the cellar, might be interested in engendering his captive’s cooperation, and in shaping behaviors that support the idea, no matter how deluded, that a loving bond exists between them."

Maybe, but it also occurs to me that the average person who uses punishment on their dog also may be deluding themselves about the loving bond. In my opinion, depending upon the amount, severity, and fairness of such tactics, dogs may not be working for those owners out of love, but rather out of self preservation.  In any case, the article is just that, an article, and not a scientific treatise.  It is also written by someone who has less experience than many of the trainers that are dismissed on this board simply because they are classified as positive, and by people who do not take the time to try the techniques they eschew.

spiritdogs

dogs may not be working for those owners out of love, but rather out of self preservation.

I fail to see how my dog wanting to initiate play with me would be matter of self preservation

espencer

spiritdogs

dogs may not be working for those owners out of love, but rather out of self preservation.

 

I fail to see how my dog wanting to initiate play with me would be matter of self preservation

I don't remember directing that comment at you in particular, but I still don't see why this is so hard to understand.  What I was talking about was not a dog's interest in play, but the tendency for dogs to obey cues from the owner because they know that if they don't a punishment will occur.  To me, no matter who the owner is, it's sad when a dog is obeying to avoid punishment, rather than to get something cool, such as praise, a toy, a treat, or a "good boy" from the owner.

spiritdogs

I don't remember directing that comment at you in particular, but I still don't see why this is so hard to understand.  What I was talking about was not a dog's interest in play, but the tendency for dogs to obey cues from the owner because they know that if they don't a punishment will occur.  To me, no matter who the owner is, it's sad when a dog is obeying to avoid punishment, rather than to get something cool, such as praise, a toy, a treat, or a "good boy" from the owner.

Well since you quoted something that i posted and this is a public forum i think either me or anybody can answer to what you post regardless who is directed to. When i talk about my dog playing that's an example that not because i use corrections he will live for self preservation. Now i see that you toned it down from self preservation to just avoid punishment. Yeah, correction vs getting something cool in return sounds very pretty in paper, in real life however there are situations where is not practical.

There are pros and cons in every technique, i see more pros in some of them where you see any and viceversa, it's just matter of personal preference

 If it all comes down to being a personal preference, then why post the article?