dog whisperer and collar

Putting reins on a horse should be like putting a leash on the dog.  It's there for safety, and not to "pop" the horse.  In fact, in the hands of a skilled rider, you will not see the reins move, nor the hands, save for a gentle squeeze to provide an indication of direction.  And, riders can also guide by the simple settling of a seatbone onto the saddle.  Watch dressage - the aids to the horse should be imperceptible.
Dogs' necks are not like humans', but they do have some small bones in the laryngeal area that frequently get damaged by leash pops that are too strong.  Not all trainers have finesse.  If you advocate a technique for the masses to use, IMO, it must be humane even when they mess up.
The argument that dolphins occasionally damage humans in the tank is not a sufficient one to convince me.  I have seen compulsion trained dogs rip the crap out of a human, too, and it isn't pretty.  No method will gain you 100% compliance or reliability over time with any sentient species.  They make decisions, although I do notice that force trained animals make fewer decisions than those trained to *offer* behaviors.  To me, it is easier to train the latter - if there is behavior, it can be modified.  That's why you often hear Karen Pryor say, "It's just a behavior."  We get all wound up about "aggression", but it is, after all, a behavior.  It is we who get sidetracked over how to modify it.  And, most neophytes who attempt to modify aggression, attempt it while the dog is being aggressive, when the real long term solution comes from initiating a pattern of "right responses" from the dog when he not in a state of arousal.  Trish McConnell tells people to ask a charging dog to "sit" for a reason.  If you don't know a dog, what's the likeliest command he might obey???  Sure, it's "sit", because most dogs learn it from puppyhood.  There have been cases where people have stopped a charge, just by "sit".  Of course, you will undoubtedly argue, there are dogs who will not, and you'd get bitten.  And, you are right, but true aggression never really goes away, it's simply managed.
I would prefer to install significant default behaviors in such a dog, that give me some statistical likelihood that he will do them, than to simply punish aggressive behavior, which often makes it worse. 
And, if you took Psych 101, you really just skimmed the surface.  I prefer a science-based approach, coupled with experience.  But, I'm not into the kind of anecdotal evidence you present.  Nor do I feel the need to respond to your sarcasm directed at my qualifications.  Suffice to say that my advanced classes are filled all the time, so that means my clients are satisfied enough to come back.  That's enough for me.  My aim in life is not to please you, or CM, or anyone else.  It's to see that the people who entrust their dogs to me end up with a lifelong, safe companion.  I just do my best to make that happen.
Frankly, it doesn't matter to me how any magazine views CM, or any public figure.  The person's work is what I observe.  I don't know how you can compare a book like "Cesar's Way" with one like "The Culture Clash"(Jean Donaldson) or "Aggression in Dogs" (Brenda Aloff).  In the latter, there are coherent explanations.  In the former, it's smoke and mirrors. 

Yes,  a dogs neck IS strong, but I'm not sure I'd agree that it is the strongest part of the body.  If it were there wouldn't be soooo many cases of tracheal damage from pulling.   Someone posted a study done in Europe and MOST of the dogs studied indeed had some degree on tracheal damage.
 
The point in using a prong or any other tool is to TEACH your dog not to pull if you've been unsuccessful to that point.  Thor started out great on lead, but as he grew and matured and darned if life didn't get in the way and interfere with the regular training walks....and then we moved, but I stayed behind to finish my degree and the guys didn't walk him at all.  After a month, well, he was headstrong and far stronger than me and it was find an appropriate tool that could be humanely used or stop walking him and let him just play in the huge yard for exercise.  Thor was my first shepherd so we learned together.  And, although we got Sheba at the same time, her walking wasn't ever the same kind of issue because she's a softer girl and more eager to please.
 
I did not want to use a prong or any other type of aversive tool on Thor.  But I did want to be able to walk him without being dragged down the street on my rump.  In my studying and research the prong was the least damaging if used properly.  And I had a trainer teach me how to use it, and how to apply it.
 
Any collar applied to the top of the neck is going to inflict more pain because the neck is more sensitive there.....and if you are using the collar correctly, gosh, putting it in the "normal" place will do the job just fine unless you want instant results.  I was willing to work with Thor and not in a huge rush to have a perfectly heeling dog at my side.  To me, the end result is worth a little time, because that way, he's LEARNED the lesson and not just been forced into submission.  If he has LEARNED the lesson, I can remove the prong, put him on a flat leash and walk down the street nicely.  That's what's happened for us.  And I didn't use corrections with the prong....nor did I let him get to the end of the lead and lunge and "self-correct".  I simply kept him on a short lead and let him figure out for himself that any pulling resulted in discomfort and it was far better to walk in a relaxed manner on a loose lead than to act like a runaway freight train.
 
I'm guessing that is the biggest difference between CM fans and +R fans.....the former seem to want instant gratification while the latter are willing to work and wait and give it time TO work.  To me training my dogs is more of a marathon than a sprint and since we learn together.........no huge rush....in fact they're learning curve is probably a LOT shorter than mine!

There is a lot of talk about pain in this thread. How the collar inflicts pain, which is the least painful collar, start with the least painful and work your way up......

Cesar's collar, Martingales, chokers, prongs are not to inflict pain and someone using it that way are using it wrong. It is a tool that is used to communicate in the dogs language. I have learned as much from watching my dogs as I have from reading and talking to people on the Internet ( I have learned the most from the behaviorist I am working with) and they don't reward each other for doing a desired behavior. The very first meeting of my two latest dogs the new one came at the older one in an excited out of control manner. The older one gave a growl and a quick nip to the back of the younger ones neck, just put her mouth on it really. The younger one imediately calmed down and understood who was in charge and to mellow out. The have gotten along great ever since, they play and show no aggresion towards each other.

I have never seen a  grown dog give another grown dog food or a toy for doing something good. Dogs really don't even give each other affection. Most problems including and especially aggresion are perpetuated by us for spoiling our loved pets with affection at the wrong time and not setting boundries first.

Having a collar that constricts or has prongs is a tool to be used in conjuction with your voice and body language to communicate to the dog in the same way that they communicate to each other. It's not to inflict pain but to let them know that their leader does not like what it going on. If it is used by itself as a cure-all I'd rather put it on the owner and jerk them around for a while. If it is used as part of an overall system of communication (which is 75% mental by the way) it can be incredibly effective.

R+ has it's usefulness as well and if that is what works for you great. It does sound "nicer" and the masses are less likely to screw it up but for behavioral problems leadership through boundries and discipline before affection is a lot more effective.

I have yet to see someone talk about a specific case when it helped their dog. The reason I asked about a website is I was hoping to read a testimonial from a client stateing that your training solved their aggression problem

richard_dragin,
To answer your question I have rehabilitated my rescue Rottweiler with Positive only methods. She is a rescue, never socialized, left tied in a back yard. She is an offensive dog and very reactive.

The CM methods have been around the dog world forever...and as much as I hate to admit it I used some of those force based methods with Athena when I first rescued her. What I found was the force based methods "suppressed" the aggression and escalated it in the long run. I thought the methods were working only to find out later they had broken a bond between she and I. Vets hated her, I could not even walk past another dog without her turning into a lunging horrible dog.

I finally met a positive only dog trainer who showed me the error of my ways. She showed me the proper body language, and how to lure Athena to a look at me command while walking past another dog. I have never been so pleased with the outcome of positive training. We only used a buckle collar for training and at first a choker with a dead ring on it, which means it could not get tight on the dogs neck. With redirectional training Athena is now a joy to take for walks.

She lives in a multi dog household and she is a very good with the other dogs.
For myself Athena is a perfect example of a last chance aggressive dog that has been reformed with positive only training. The behaviorist also trained me as well.
I have also met many dogs trained the CM way...for the really aggressive/reactive dogs it escalated their aggression. One fire fighter rescued a dog aggressive APBT from the rescue center...he had the help of a Canine unit officer and with the choke collar, e-collar etc they managed to successfully ruin the dog. Although the methods seemed to be working at first it became very obvious that the dogs aggression was just suppressed and the dog shut down for awhile...but, once the dog began again it was 100 times worse. The dog learned not to trust Bob as well and the dog was put to sleep. Athena was worse than this dog when first rescued...but, with positive training, although it took a little longer kept my dog from having to be put to sleep. Plus, having a dog trust you is amazing.

All of our dogs being adults when we took them in were resource guarders as well.  Even the Newf's as they grew up in kennels where it's eat and guard your food or another dog will take it.  Through positive training we have perfect dogs and are no longer resource gaurders.  We can put all 5 out in the compound with RMB's with no isssues...actually Athena has been known to share her bones with the others.  I can also let them lick out the roasting pan after cooking a chicken with no problems.  So, yes, through positive only training you can certainly have a well organized group of dogs that feel confident and comfortable enough not to have issues with each other.  My dogs were all adults when we got them at different times, all the issues at first have been redirected and now we have a nice calm sweet group of dogs with no worries of fights etc.       

My behaviorist has helped many truely aggressive dogs with positive only techniques...she also uses clicker training for some of these dogs with wonderful results.  Many dogs that were one paw away from being euthanized were saved by her.  Plus, here methods shaped a better behavior and allowed the dogs a positive manner to express themselves...especially when it comes to predatory aggression.[]

I know the differance between Classical and Operant from Psych 101, I know that treats are not the only possible reward. I have heard the marine mammal argument before but from my experiance swimming with dolphins I learned a thing or two. Seems they can teach the dolphin tricks but can't keep it from occasionally dragging someone to the bottom of the tank and sitting on them for paying too much attention to a subordinate dolphin.

 
That's not the impression I get from the experts in marine animal training. They say quite the opposite from you richard. They mention that a positive trained marine animal is very easy to work with and will not drag a person down...but, a negative trained animal will and has in the past...they went through this about 25 years ago and learned from mistakes made with negative training.
 
Have you read the book called "Whale Done: The Power of Positive Relationships" by Chuck Tompkins - seaworld trainer for 25 years and Thad Lacinak Training for SeaWorld and Busch Gardens adventure parks with 30 years of experience.
 
Here are some statements from them.
Regarding force based training. "We've been training animals for a long time-long enough that we, like most trainers 30 years ago, used to employ both positive and punishment-based training. We've seen the pro's and con's of both approaches. It's true you can get immediate changes in behavior using punishment. Sure you can get a dog to stop jumping up on you if you smack him...but what else have you done? you've torn down your relationship with that dog, and you have shown him that you are aggressive and unpredictable. And none of this is beneficial to the learning process.
 
"Negative training methods cause all animals, humans included, to exhibit a stress response-fight or flight. The chemicals released in the body in this state impede learning and retention...and increases aggression."
 
They then tell a story about 25 years ago how they used positive and negative training...the negative was taking away a valued toy. They soon learned that negative training made the whales unpredictable in the water and dangerous for the trainer...which they learned from and now only employ positive trainer as it makes the whales trust worthy....the only time an animal dragged anyone down to the bottom of the pool was when forced./negative training was used...they learned from mistakes 30 years ago...which it seems CM is regressing back to 30 years ago...which is weird because now trainers are so much more knowledgeable now a days.
 
Quote
Tompkins "We realized that if we were ever going to be able to safely get in the water with the whales, we would have to get them to genuinely like us, to build a relationship with them. We had to be able to trust them, and they had to be able to trust us. So, no more punishments. We immediately stopped all negatives in our training. When Rahu didn't respond to a cue, or did the wrong thing, we just ignored it. And we kept up all the positive reinforcements for the behaviors we wanted. What's amazing is how much better our relationships are with our whales today, the whales who are treated right, training these whales is a piece of cake! They like us, they enjoy training, they offer behavior very freely, they aren't aggressive.
 
Anyhow the article goes on about the wonders of positive training and how they learned from mistakes made 25-30 years ago that negative training makes for an untrustworthy animal and unpredictable. Having positive trained animals makes for a good relationship and animals that are not going to hurt you...which is important in a big killer whale.

ORIGINAL: Cally01
I finally met a positive only dog trainer who showed me the error of my ways. She showed me the proper body language, and how to lure Athena to a look at me command while walking past another dog.

You know that sounds a lot like Cesar and the behaviorist I am working with. When you say "lure" do you mean with food or voice? It is all about body language, tone of voice and affection at the right time (not all the time). A lot of the anti Cesar people keep refering to his methods as "punishment" and "negative" which I don't feel is the case. It's about establishing dominance through leadership through calm assertive behavior. If you punish a dog you will lose it's trust, if you communicate in a way it understands you will build trust.

I am a bit tired of the marine mammal  comparisons also, dogs are not marine mammals and their minds are wired diferently. I can only speak from personal experiance of having interacted with dolphins that were only positive trained . As for the experts, how do they explain when there is an aggresive act by a marine mammal in the last 25 years since the big switch to positive only training?

richard, the luring was first done with food, then we progressed to voice.
 
 

The older one gave a growl and a quick nip to the back of the younger ones neck, just put her mouth on it really. The younger one imediately calmed down and understood who was in charge and to mellow out. The have gotten along great ever since, they play and show no aggresion towards each other.

 
I've seen a momma dog scruff and pin her pups. I have seen a momma cat, in the back yard behind me, do the same, right there in front of God and everybody, as my mom would say. The neighbors diagonal from me have two border collies and a small terrier. The momma BC will scruff, pin, and bite, and it's not for play. She is maintaining her alpha position. This happens in broad daylight. Silly dogs. Haven't they read about +R?
 
[linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXUDUlueSk4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXUDUlueSk4[/link]
 
 

I have seen dogs correct each other, too.  But, I have never seen a mother dog break the tiny bones in her pup's larynx with a leash pop, or use a choke collar on it.  These arguments are absurd.  We are not dogs, and we communicate clumsily in canine.  So, we use the "international language" of +R.
This argument can drag on forever, since we are never going to convince you richard.  But, my sincere advice would be that, when you get your next puppy, start with a clicker class, or a +R trainer who really knows their stuff, and commit yourself to doing it.  I think that the proof will be in the pudding, and you may be back to tell us that it worked as well for you as it has for us.  If you just persist in your opinion without doing that, then IMO you have not had personal experience sufficient to judge one system versus the other.

But, I have never seen a mother dog break the tiny bones in her pup's larynx with a leash pop, or use a choke collar on it

 
I would call that misuse of equipment and technique, rather than an indictment of the technique itself. That is, a mild correction reminiscent of a momma scruff would work. Physical damage would not.

IMHO (and laypersons at that) a true alpha doesn't have to maintain his/her position by use of violence.  Yep, every one of mine will correct one another.  But, it's rarely done in a way that will elicit a "that will do" from Mom......or even an "eh eh".......
 
I have never been one for aversive training methods, so perhaps the same could be said for me Anne. That since I haven't tried both ways, I shouldn't judge the traditional?   I could never even bring myself to rub a pups nose in a mistake even when that was the prevailing wisdom.  But I have ALWAYS had the greatest dogs.....well behaved, loyal and loving.  So, even using my "soft" ways, I guess I must have been doing something right all these years.
 
And, I'll say again, with all the litters that have been through my doors over the years, the WORST punishment I've ever seen momma give is a gentle nose nudge, but usually just "the look".  I guess I've had really odd dogs that they don't scruff their pups.......

break the tiny bones in her pup's larynx

rub a pups nose in a mistake

How on earth can you guys use examples like those in a thread talking about a training collar that is ment to communicate and not harm. Why are you even posting about +R only training in a thread about Cesar's methods unless you are just here to detract from the topic and his methods? It's not about punishment or violence as you guys continuously paint dominance based training. It's about teaching the person to lead through body language, tone and and mind set. There are some leash or hand corrections involved and the collar that this thread is about is just a tool to help with those.

Please go post in a clicker thread so people who buy into that as a cure all can agree with you and everyone can have a warm fuzzy feeling. I'll save clicker training for tricks the same as dolphin trainers use it to teach tricks. When I want my dog to understand WHY they are doing something such as staying back when I open the door I will use body language and tone to get the message across for a lasting behavior that I can depend on for the well being of my dogs.

I'm sorry that you found my comment offensive.  However, back in the day that was THE way to housetrain a pup....or should I say house BREAK?  You rubbed it's nose in the mistake and whapped it with a rolled up newspaper.
 
Had I used harsh methods with Sheba, I would have a frightened mess on my hands with the ability to pull me off my feet and attack whatever scares her.  By using the kinder/gentler methods, I now have a confident girl who LOOKS to me for reassurance that the dog or person is not going to bother her and who is able to keep on trucking without feeling the need to snarl, lunge and act like a lunatic.  Sheba is "softer" and could easily have been totally shut down by the use of aversives.  I would never even have attempted to use something as aversive as a prong collar on her, not even in her worst pulling days......she WANTS to please me, but has to understand HOW to please me.  And, trying to communicate with a canine, and expecting them to understand what we want is imperfect at best.  But, I had to understand the root of her problem and find ways to work around it.  The first time the behavioralist saw Sheba he commented that she was absolutely terrified.  He hit that nail square on the head....but, I already KNEW that.
 
In that dogs don't think the way people think how would applying pressure, or using a tool that applies pressure to her neck have HELPED with the fear?  She see's a scarey person, lunges a bit and her neck hurts.   Gosh, I'm RIGHT to be afraid of that scarey person, cuz he made my neck hurt.  Stranger (scarey person)=neck pain.  And I believe that's about as far as the thought process goes.
 
Again, none of these tools, be it a choker, a prong or an illusion collar are about anything other than increasing control by causing pain, or at the least discomfort.  And even knowing that, yep, I did use a prong on Thor because he was a headstrong and very STRONG animal who was far more intent on pulling than pleasing.  And, being a tree isn't terribly effective when the animal is strong enough to pull you down the street. But, I chose the LEAST aversive and I used it as short a time as possible.  And in his case, I knew that he would respond to the prong, while with Sheba, I knew it would shut her down.  It's a matter I believe of knowing your dogs.
 
There may well be animals who NEED a stronger hand and unpleasant tools...but I would maintain that IF the owners had done their job early on these dogs wouldn't exist.  It's all about doing things RIGHT to begin with, and shouldn't be about later having to fix the owners mistakes at the expense of the dog.

This thread is supposed to be about Slate Mag's take on CM, not whether we, who are here to critique their "take", should be here or not.  richard, if you are so intent on not having anyone criticize *your* point of view, or CM's, for that matter, then what are you doing on an Internet dog forum?
It's fine for you to believe what you will about CM, but it's also fine for others to defend *their* positions.  Just don't let it get ugly.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

This thread is supposed to be about Slate Mag's take on CM

 
Just to show you that you are not here but just to attack CM without even caring about the topic you are in the wrong thread!!![sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=rotfl.gif]