Macho Trainers

    • Gold Top Dog
    Do they have a potential for repeating their crime. IMO, yes and that means they don#%92t get my full forgiveness and trust. For me its the same for an aggressive dog. The rehab dog is welcome in my home but I will take precautious. In my past I did live with a little crazy dog for 15 years. We just coexisted.

    While I totally see and agree with what you are saying here DPU and I mean no disrespect.. I believe that ;Probe is stating what HE PERSONALLY feels comfortable with... and that may not necessarily be right for others.
     
    On a side not I commend you for your work and agree that former gang member CAN turn their life around... but it is hard to ever fully be able to trust them. My job with injury prevention requires I hire and work with former gang members and have them come to schools with me to teach kids about the negative consequences...  despite having so much going for them...the recidivism rate with my program has been about 50% thus far...  it is a tough thing to trust again...
     
    • Gold Top Dog
    If Probe1957 said he was not comfortable with the potential...then I would not have had a reason to post.  Everyone and every dog has the potential, but some more likely than others, especially those that have a history.
    • Gold Top Dog
    If Probe1957 said he was not comfortable with the potential...then I would not have had a reason to post. Everyone and every dog has the potential, but some more likely than others, especially those that have a history.

     
    DPU, perhaps I misunderstood his intent, but I took the following comment to mean that it would not be a choice HE PERSONALLY would chose...
     
      ;Personally, I am not willing to take the risk.  There are too many nice dogs wasting away in shelters.


     
    If I am in error I apologize Probe1957 for misrepresenting your meaning... 
    • Gold Top Dog
    You are correct Shel.  While an aggressive dog wouldn't be right for me, I certainly don't mean to imply that an aggressive dog might not be right for someone.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

    Fair enough. Just as all people have the potential to murder and all men have the potential to be rapists. It is the BEHAVIOR I object to, not the potential. When people with the potential to murder and rape actually do it, we put them in jail. When dogs with the potential to be aggressive actually are, we should adjust their attitude with a 158g hollow point to the brain stem.


    Billy, does that mean you think no dog that aggresses is salvageable?  What's your definition of the transgression that gets a dog blown into next week?



    Someone said on another thread that past behaviour is indicative of future behaviour and I agree with that 100%.  In that light, even if a dog is "salvageable" I question whether they SHOULD be "salvaged" over the thousands of nicer, safer animals doomed to die in shelters.  Looks like I'm on similar footing with amstaffy on that one.... Not all dogs should be saved.  It follows that I don't really see a place for the kind of trainers you are describing... it kind of makes them redundant doesn't it, if we culled dogs instead of expending time, money and energy into "rehabbing" them.... knowing they can never be truly "cured" anyway. 
    • Gold Top Dog
    All I have is my own experience to go on.
     
    Ogre is an aggressive dog. He is fear aggressive, and he is also protective of our home, and me. When I got him, he was a wreck.  He snapped at all strangers, regardless of intent, and barked and snarled at anyone who acted in any way that confused him...and that was most people. All of the people I knew who used "traditional" training methods insisted that he was being "dominant" and the only way he would ever improve is for me to "get tough with him." So I did. And not only did none of it work, not only did Ogre completely shut down, but he got worse.
     
    Finally, I used my common sense (and aknowledged me initial gut instinct) and realized that this dog was not testing anyone. He didn't want to "dominate" anybody. He was afraid. I read up on positive training, started a NILIF program, worked on desensitizing him to everything he feared, and most importantly, picked up a clicker. Lo and behold, it worked. Within a few days he was no longer barking at inanimate objects. Within a few weeks, he was going into strange buildings and accepting greetings from polite strangers. Recently, he's becoming okay even with loud, obnoxious, impolite strangers and their equally impolite dogs. Within the next year or so, I hope to have him safe and well behaved enough to earn a CGC title. Whether that will happen, I don't know...but he certainly looks promising with the progress he's making. I won't test him unless I'm sure he deserves that title.
     
    Macho trainers...well, if it works for them, and they don't see a reason to change...fine. But for them to assume that positive trainers are nothing more than cookie waving pansies is narrow minded and stupid. In my experience, they are just as narrow minded and cruel in their dealings with dogs as they are in their dealings with trainers with a differing philosophy.
     
    Training is not a "one size fits all" thing. I wish more trainers would understand that. I personally no longer like traditional training, after having seen the results of positive training on my dogs...but I have not met EVERY dog, and it's possible that there are dogs out there who are just too hard headed to respond to positive training. I have yet to meet one, but it's possible that they exist. Likewise, there are plenty of dogs who don't respond to traditional training...and I think that Ogre is one of them.
     
    Ogre, in the hands of a leash-popping, e-collar weilding, yelling, stomping, alpha rolling trainer...would either be a completely shut down dog, or a completely vicious one. He simply does not respond to harshness...but he will do ANYTHING for anyone who has shown him an ounce of kindness. That alone proves the macho trainer's "your method doesn't work you are too soft har har har" mentality completely wrong, IMO. I have an aggressive dog. We've improved through positive training, traditional training impeded him. That's all the proof I need.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: Chuffy

    Someone said on another thread that past behaviour is indicative of future behaviour and I agree with that 100%.  In that light, even if a dog is "salvageable" I question whether they SHOULD be "salvaged" over the thousands of nicer, safer animals doomed to die in shelters.... 

     
    This has been said 3 times here on this thread and it so needs a rebutt.  But I am biting my tongue for respect of the OP, I think it is off topic.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: amstaffy

    Why must it always come back to "Us" and "Them" ?

    Do I dare ask how many people on this forum have had the real experience with a truely aggressive dog?


     This is probably the most practical response I have seen,and also the way I believe..

      As for trully aggressive dogs,I have had to deal with a few,but not from a training perspective.These were dogs that I lived near,and knew how they were being raised.For the most part,these truly aggressive dogs had their aggressinveness fine tuned by the owners or handlers.It may or may not have happened on purpose,but the end result was the same.

     
    Fear bitters and reactive dogs really shouldn't be classified as an aggressive dog... they are driven by something different the the aggressive dog..which has no place in society. Honorable, conscious breeders culled dogs. In this day we must save them all...not every dog deserves saving. They all deserve evaluation and they also deserve to be PTS if they are not suitable to live in society...my breed included

    Yeah, here it comes again, not everydog is going to work on a specific "type/method" and a good trainer/behaviorist, a REALLY good one will change their methods to modify FOR THE DOG they are working with to help modify/correct the behavior when training the owner and dog how to live with said dog


     I coulnd't agree more and don't understand how people can think dog training is a black and white issue.

      The only thing that would bother me at all,would be to cause physical pain and or humiliation to the dog being trained.This would be true of a puppy,or an older dog where issues are allready present.



     
    • Gold Top Dog
    "Macho Trainers"? I wasn't sure who we are talking about, so I Googled it:







    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: probe1957

    You are correct Shel.  While an aggressive dog wouldn't be right for me, I certainly don't mean to imply that an aggressive dog might not be right for someone.



    I guess my thought on this is that even if someone thinks that the aggressive dog - and, remember we are talking truly aggressive, not "just" fear aggressive (as if the teeth do any less damage when they bite for a different reason) - but, is the dog right for that person's family, friends, neighborhood, or universe?  The problem is that management of such dogs is a real problem unless you are a hermit.  Quite frequently, the news gets broadcast about the aggressive dog, usually a Pit (because if it was a Lab it wouldn't make the news) escaping from it's pen and attacking someone.  Dogs escape, the manage to scrape their muzzles off, someone accidentally opens the wrong door, there's an accident and the car door springs open...etc.  So, this isn't a responsibility anyone should take lightly.  But, the question is also how to manage such dogs from a behavioral standpoint.  Billy's suggestion is extreme, but humane euthanasia is certainly an option, and I don't begrudge any owner the heartrending decision to take that route.  After all, no one gets bitten, no child is harmed, and the dog doesn't spend its life caged, muzzled or isolated.  Most dogs in Billy's scenario never make it into a normal JQP family if shelters, breeders, and rescues are doing their jobs, but sometimes a dog fools even the best, with its true personality coming out only after it has been in a situation for a while.

    People forget that aggression is normal canine behavior and that any dog can be aggressive, given the right set of circumstances (what trainers often refer to as "triggers"), but there are some dogs who aggress with a nip that doesn't break skin, and others who take multiple bites and consume flesh.  Big difference.  If a trainer thinks that by physically punishing such a dog he will gain its compliance, bully for him, because it just might work.  For him.  But, what about his 90 pound aunt from two states away, who hasn't seen the family in six years, then comes to the door to surprise him?  Not.  It's equally as possible that the dog will not tolerate such discipline and will retaliate, and perhaps only after several episodes.  Better have your bite suit on when that happens, buddy. 

    Much has been made of fear aggression somehow being less dangerous than "true" aggression (whatever that is - aggression is aggression, it just occurs on some kind of continuum).  But, the fear aggressive dog is the likeliest to bite statistically.  It was fear aggression that made that Viszla that CM pulled from under the chair bite him.  He simply set off the right set of triggers.  Frightened dog, in hiding, being yanked out of his hiding place by a stranger and pulled toward something he was afraid of.  If you think about it, it's a good thing it was CM, not some five year old kid.  Watching that episode, you would think the dog had been rehabilitated by "flooding".  And, for that particular scary thing, quite possible (ron2 can cite the study on flooding) that he was.
    But, others, myself included, would contend that the dog is still a fearful sort, and that he easily could bite again given a set of circumstances that push him over his "bite threshold".  So, I prefer to think of aggressive dogs, whatever the type, as either managed well or not managed well.  Able to be managed, or not.  That way, no one is lulled into a false sense of security, and they take precautions to avoid triggering a bite while they continue to work on training and behavior modification.  One reason that positive techniques are successful is that they build trust between dog and handler.  Very valuable if you want the dog's default behavior, when frightened, to be "look to the handler for guidance".  Even a severely aggressive dog, if it trusts its handler, may be more manageable than one that does not (exception might be in the case of territorial aggression, which, by definition suggests an inability on the part of even a normally compliant dog to pay attention to handler commands). 
    I think the one thing that bothers me about a lot of the macho trainers in my area is that I seldom hear them suggest anything but a "vet visit" to clients with aggressive dogs.  They don't get specific about thyroid panel testing, for example, even when dealing with breeds that have a predisposition to hypothyroidism, and don't seem to know that most vets don't do the whole panel unless the owner asks.  That would be the first thing most positive trainers would suggest if your Rottweiler or Golden Retriever was aggressive... And, they are too tied to the notion of "showing the dog who's alpha".  That kind of behavior is not leadership, it's bullying.
    • Gold Top Dog
    "Macho Trainers"? I wasn't sure who we are talking about, so I Googled it:


    Apparently, those guys all have well behaved dogs.  Is that what you're saying?  [8D]
    • Gold Top Dog
    I have seen the effects of these macho trainers and know exactly where you're coming from. I have seen it far too often (in fact, there is legislation being brought against a macho shock-collar trainer here for liability issues). Since I had the first-hand experience at having my arm in full control of a GSD's mouth a few weeks ago, I think I can relate. And I can tell you, any effort of "force" upon this dog would only have resulted in severe injury to me, I promise you.
     
    One thing I have learned over the years, a good slogan I have come to accept, is that the larger the dog, the kinder you are to it. What that means is, on average, a lot of these larger dogs with aggression issues are the types of dogs that are NOT going to take bull from any human. You push them, you're darn right they are going to push back (and a lot of people believe that being forceful with a dog in that way, is teaching the dog that "hey, it's okay to use aggression to get your point across", and there is reasonable evidence to believe this theoretically). Some of them don't of course, as you get different personalities in all breeds, but a high majority of them will. And it is these dogs, because of the sheer power of them, that are going to end up maiming and killing people. I wish I could go back to a lot of those maimed and dead victims, and ask just what happened to cause the aggression, and to truly investigate if attempts at using these techniques only made the dog worse. I think we would find a strong correlation. There is ample evidence out there that supports how dogs who are already acting aggressively will be only further stimluated by acts of aggression acted upon them.
     
    Of course on the other hand I'm sure there are just as many "clicker trainers" that have encouraged and made aggression problems worse too, because heaven knows that not everyone who claims to be a positive trainer knows what they are doing. [:D
     
    Kim
    • Gold Top Dog
    Of course on the other hand I'm sure there are just as many "clicker trainers" that have encouraged and made aggression problems worse too, because heaven knows that not everyone who claims to be a positive trainer knows what they are doing.

     
    oh yeah. Or the old classic way of encouraging fear-aggression by petting and soothing the scared dog.
    • Gold Top Dog
    Or the old classic way of encouraging fear-aggression by petting and soothing the scared dog.

     
    Well, I'm not so sure of that as a generalization. There is a lot of mounting evidence that soothing a truly phobic dog does absolutely not make the fear worse. Once you leave operant mode and enter limbic mode, it's an entirely different story. I'm not hung up on the fact that 'all dogs get worse when soothed', because I myself have soothed truly terrified dogs and have seen good results with it (the results being the fear diminished, it did not sensitize). If you're interested in some of the information behind this I'd be happy to try to dig it up for you. [:)]
    • Gold Top Dog
    I think this can go on even if the dog is not aggressive. I think it can be about personality and upbringing.

    A dog can be confident, independant, and have an understanding of what is or is not fair, because they have been treated fairly during their lifetime.





    . What that means is, on average, a lot of these larger dogs with aggression issues are the types of dogs that are NOT going to take bull from any human. You push them, you're darn right they are going to push back