Aversive methods

Unfortunately, use of a loud noise or a squirt of water to stop a dog's behavior is often advocated by trainers. It sometimes seems temporarily effective-- but I agree, these methods really aren't teaching the dog anything.  All you are doing is "managing" the dog, not training the dog.

I've seen those shake-can things that are really super-loud and I think that Conrad would probably pee himself if I ever tried to use one of those things on him. In fact, I'm pretty much sure of it.
 
What's wrong with just teaching a "watch me" command?

Unfortunately, use of a loud noise or a squirt of water to stop a dog's behavior is often advocated by trainers

 
We used to use a wooden spoon on a pot whenever our Akita was getting too rough with the Pekes.  We actually used it only twice, both times he was only about 12 months old.  For the next 10 years all we had to do is say "I'm going to get the Boom-Boom" and he'd immediately leave the room and cease the behavior.
 
However, when the Pekes would fight, which wasn't that often, nothing could or would distract them from their fighting.  They had to be seperated for at least an hour.
 
I don't advocate aversive training now, but it was certainly safer (from my Mom's perspective) than trying to disengage a 135lb dog from a situation that he was enjoying.  After learning alot from this forum, I won't use aversive techniques like this, except in a serious emergency involving multiple dogs.  I think it's easier on the dog and on the human if the human teaches a reliable "leave it" command.

I'll admit that I've used the spray bottle technique.  I've given up on that because someone would always leave the danged bottle in the wrong place and it would be eaten.......
 
My crew have progressed to the place where I can say "that will do" or an occassional "leave it" when they are getting testy with one another.  Altho, this morning when poor Theo was under attack, I grabbed the jug I use to refill the water bowls and dumped it on Thunder.......that's about the most aversive thing I need.  A good splash of cold water certainly "rained on his parade"!
 
I can see the use of a prong collar on a headstrong dog who just refuses to learn leash manners, but beyond that, nope.

I unintentionally used adversive training with my dog when he was very young. Our doorway into the family room was wider than the baby gates we were using, so we would simply lean the gate across the doorway to keep the pup out. Sometimes the pup would bump against it, or more often one of the kids, sending the gate crashing to the tiled floor with a load bang. It never fell on the pup, but the noise scared him for sure!

My dog, as a result developed a very strong sense of boundary. He will not pass any sort of barrier unless hand lead around the object. Last summer my sons built me (my dog) a new picket fence. Because of the grade, there were a few areas that my dog (75lb) could easily slip under and escape. To my surprise he has never once tried. He will stand in front of the large gap and bark at the tourmenting squirrels on the other side, but he will NOT pass beyond his boundary.

I have never intentionally used this method, but it has certainly made any necessary restrictions for our dog very simple, effective and reliable.

Using a noise to distract the dog can be a useful tool but if it is scaring them it's not going to help. If clapping the hands gets their attention than it is redirecting their thought away from what was going to be an unwanted behavior. If the dog isn't so distracted that a "look at me" or "leave it" command will work that is great but for a more distracted dog that might not work all the time.

As far as the TV show you wrote about...Were they "dragging" the dog or maybe instead they were trying to get it moving forward. If a dog is stuck in a corner afraid chances are you won't be able to do to much and your best bet is to get the dog moving forward so his mind will move forward as well.

One of my dogs has some aggresion if she is on a certain dog bed and someone approaches her and shows affection. At that time there is no correction that will "snap her out of it" and the only thing to do is lead her away. The moment she is led away and starts thinking again she is back to being the sweetest little dog but there is definately a trigger there. The main thing I have to get visitors to understand is that you never approach a dog to give it affection, always make it come to you. A lead dog never goes and dotes on a subordinate dog. The subordinate always goes to the leader. As long as they stick to that rule they think our little Macie is the sweetest thing ever.

I am guilty of this but only when a fight errupts at one of our foster dog showings.  I also have to stop instinctively place my leg between the two dogs.  So far I have been lucky.
 
I don't why I do this because I see how my dogs react to firecrackers, thunder, etc and how uneasy and frightened they get.

DPU,
I have stopped many a fight at the dog park with a really loud yell. I'd also rather put my leg against a dog to move it off than to grab a collar and get bit on the hand because that is the same place the other dog is probably aiming for. Most of those "fights" are not truely fights but shows of dominance and if left to work it out they would probably be fine. Unfortunately we never want to risk injury to the dogs to find out if they will work it out so we step in.

ORIGINAL: richard_dragin

As far as the TV show you wrote about...Were they "dragging" the dog or maybe instead they were trying to get it moving forward. If a dog is stuck in a corner afraid chances are you won't be able to do to much and your best bet is to get the dog moving forward so his mind will move forward as well.

They were dragging the dog out of the room. Backwards, forwards, whatever direction, didn't seem to matter. She wasn't in a corner or anything like that. I think the reason they dragged her is that they wanted to act very quickly so the dog would know the moment she lifted a lip she got dragged in the opposite direction. It seemed kinda silly to me, though, considering she was lifting her lip because she desperately didn't want the people to come near her anyway. What's the point in removing her from a situation as a punishment if she's upset because she's in that very situation in the first place? It did seem to work a little in the end, but I suspect only because she got tired of being jerked and growled at. I can only think it would have squashed the tiny amount of confidence she did have.

I use a loud "ah!" sound to get my dog's attention in moments when she's about to do something I don't want her doing. She knows it means I'm going to rouse on her if she doesn't stop, but it certainly doesn't frighten her. She'll cheerfully wolf down cat food in the face of that and only stop when I arrive to chase her away. I also clap my hands sometimes to get her attention. Again, doesn't scare her. I think my dog would pee herself if I used one of those loud cans, too. There's no way I'd ever use something like that on her. It's not like I don't think dogs should be told when they're doing the wrong thing or roused on when they're doing something they know perfectly well that they're not allowed to do, but when you're teaching a dog something, I feel I really don't want to scare them or make them feel unhappy or upset. Whether you use a noise or physical punishment doesn't make any difference to me, and I doubt it does to the dogs, either.

I think noise should be used judiciously.  I have used it to stop fights, but some dogs will escalate in that situation, so you do have to be careful.  Otherwise, the only time I might consider using noise is if the dog does not associate the aversive noise with me.  For example, if the dog attempts to countersurf, and some cola cans just happen to fall out of the cabinet above (because some human yanked them with an unseen string).  Then, the dog assumes that there's a "kitchen witch" who doesn't want him to surf the counter, but he has not learned to distrust his human.

There is nothing like a good "leave it" to keep dogs out of all kinds of trouble.  Acorns on the ground - leave it.  Off leash dog - leave it.  Pile of deer poop - leave it.  And, if you have a really reliable recall, "leave it - come" can save your dog's life.  Truck barreling down the driveway - leave it/come.  You just keep upping the ante while you train.  First, the dog must leave a milk bone to get a Charley Bear treat.  Next, must leave the CB treat to get a liver treat.  Next, leave the liver treat, get roast beef.  Leave roast beef, get a floppy frisbee (very special to a certain little speckled monster) Etc., always making sure the dog leaves the lower value item, and gets the higher one from you.  Eventually, if you keep up this kind of training, and the dog learns you *always* have something better for him when he leaves the "forbidden" object alone, you should be able to call her off a cat.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs
....... and the dog learns you *always* have something better for him when he leaves the "forbidden" object alone, you should be able to call her off a cat.

So do you go from the Frisbee to the cat? What comes after cat, squirrel? How does the cat feel about all this?..... Just kidding with you Ann, I understand the process and think it has it's merits.

Yanking the cans with the string though?  That doesn't sound like +R to me. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that +P? Not that I am against that technique either but if everything is supposed to be +R how does that fit in? Is +R just  a marketing term for the masses to latch onto?

Richard, I tend to think that it is not so much a marketing term as a "look at how smart and knowledgeable I am" term. Doesn't make it meaningless, but it sure as heck irritates me. But if it's not +R, then what's it going to be? I personally think there's nothing wrong with saying "postitive reinforcement" and it's a more accessible way to talk about dog training, but that's just me. Your point that there's a place for something other than strictly positive reinforcement is a valid one. I don't think it's natural for us to never shout at our dog when he's doing something dreadful, or never let him know that he's displeased us. It should be about communication rather than methods, IMHO. I so rarely shout at my dog that when I have had more than enough and am totally fed up and shout, my dog runs to her bed and sits there looking desperately unhappy. That always makes me realise what I'm doing and I go and reassure her, but the important thing in that exchange is that we've communicated very effectively to each other and it results in both me calming down and her calming down. Would I get the same response if I'd carefully taught her with positive reinforcement alone that she should go and lie down when I shout? I can't see that working nearly as well. She runs to her bed because she wants me to stop being mad and start giving her love again. If she only ran to her bed because she wanted me to start giving her love, I don't think she'd be running, for a start. In that case, you've got a double reinforcer: bad thing stops, good thing starts.

Certainly not to say you should always shout or growl and then follow it with rewards. If you did that, I think you'd have a very confused and frightened dog. Just that it's a part of natural communication to communicate both your pleasure and your displeasure. I try to reserve communicating my displeasure for the moments that my dog is really acting up and totally ignoring my attempts to get her attention, but I don't feel it's wrong to let my dog know she's making me mad.

ORIGINAL: corvus
 .......my dog runs to her bed and sits there looking desperately unhappy. That always makes me realise what I'm doing and I go and reassure her, but the important thing in that exchange is that we've communicated very effectively to each other and it results in both me calming down and her calming down.........

Sorry to get on you when you are agreeing with me but....

You are making a huge mistake. You should never go to your dog to give it affection even though you think you are calming her down. You are not calming her but telling her she is above you. You should never give your dog affection when she is scared or upset. You are telling her it is OK to be scared and probably why you have a scared dog in the first place.

When you want to give affection always call her to you. When you want to calm her down call her to you and walk her around without talking or praising just moving forward while being calm yourself.

Dogs are not children who need to be reasured when they are scared. They are dogs who want a strong leader who does not lose their cool and is always calm and assertive. If your dog thinks you are upset than it thinks it should be upset. If you reasure it for being upset than it reinforces that behavior. Don't punish or reward your dog for what it is doing, only for what it is thinking.

Disclaimer!....That last statement does not apply to clicker type training where of course you are rewarding the action.

I think it really depends on the dog.  Rose is very soft so a simple no is all it takes for her to realize shes doing something wrong.  Colton, on the other hand, is a crazy man!  He now knows leave it, but it took a lot of work.  He used to love to torment my rabbits(he is a Parson after all), but it really stressed them.  I used to try to redirect him to something better, didn't work.  I tried spraying him, he liked the water.  So, I finally had to result to making a loud noise.  Usually, he would go right back to the rabbits after giving me a look like "why did you just do that?"  Finally, he realized that this crazy noise comes whenever he torments the rabbits.  He doesn't bother them at all now.  He will look at them, but won't cry and bite the bars of the cages.  It really just depends on the dog.
spiritdogs...I am going to have to try that "kitchen witch" idea!  Colton has now learned how to get on the counter.  I need something to make him think twice before he jumps up there again.