How Far Are You Willing to Go?

mrv, you probably can't, but I don't think any of us claimed to be 100% positive.  If you were, you wouldn't withhold a reward either, since that is a punisher.  What amazes me about the number of responses on this particular thread is the number who think they need to defend aversives.  We all claim to love dogs, but insist they need physical correction right from the get go???  I don't think, if most people set aside the anti +R hysteria, that many people start out doing negative things to their dogs on purpose.  What I think is that they haven't received good instruction, or thought that they were perfectly capable to do it on their own.  It reminds me of the puppy owners who come to class and are taught, week one, how to have a dog that doesn't jump up.  They are even told that it's up to them whether they even care if their dog jumps!  Yet, by week four, inevitably, there are some folks who thought I was completely berserk in what I was telling them, so they ignored me, didn't listen to the part about everyone in the dog's life being on the same page, or took the advice of that neighbor (the "knee the dog in the chest type") who has had dogs for thirty years and - voila - the dog still jumps.  Then, they claim that +R didn't work for their dog.  It's the "my dog failed puppy class" syndrome.  The dogs don't generally fail on their own. [:'(]
The owners who listened, and did as instructed, have a dog that is arriving at my feet in a "sit" to greet me by week 2. 
I don't have a problem with aversives if they are humane, properly applied, and on a dog with a temperament that is not damaged by them.   But, I really think that "how far" should not mean "to get immediate compliance at any cost", it should be thought of as "so my dog or a human is not injured right this minute".  I want people to view training as a process that takes time, is worth the effort, and is *fun* for both human and canine.  I hope that isn't too much to ask. [sm=uhoh.gif]

Yes I agree that many folks have a poor experience with the instruction and end up with a poorly trained animal.
 
Yes I agree that aversives may be used appropriately, and I use them.
 
No I dont agree that withholding a reenforcer is punishment, it is imperfect extinction.  (thats my training pure and simple)
 
I think what gets this topic going and keeps it going are the statements that are perceived as  condemning (about training practices) and imply that some one may not care or love their animals as much as some one else.
 
Yes folks get caught up in allegiences very easily.  Modeled behavior that showed a desired outcome will likely be copied. 
 
I think there are benefits and draw backs to this discussion:  I like that it keeps going (in some cases).  I find it "uncomfortable" when I read messages with the visual images of the typical arguement non verbals.  I really dont want folks to turn off and not consider the opportunity to learn  more.
 
Yes I use aversives, I try very hard to keep them at an absolute minimum.  I try very hard to never use them in the establishment of a behavior.  I try to use them in a very limited manner once behavior is established.  But some times I get it wrong.  I need to be able to step back evaluate and start again.  I think some of these posts do not foster that option in people.  So although we agree in some cases, we dont in others.  What's more, that is ok.

Quick comment and then I'll let everyone continue debating. I think the way you train is very closely connected to the way you are as a person. Really. People who are hands-on trainers, physical, are probably that way in all other aspects of their lives. There are people who are quick to make negative comments at work, and those who aren't. Those who are quick to give a little swat to their kids, and those who aren't. It's within our personalitites.
 
I find myself (as shown in a Behavior thread) still wanting to be more phyiscal with my dogs because I was taught to be, but I'm not physical with my nephews (I use time outs) and I wasn't comfortable being physical with my dogs. I really wasn't. So, I'm experiencing "extinction" now, with regard to that, and happy to do so. It only caused panic for them, as they often didn't understand what the bleep I was doing, and caused my own frustration level to rise. 
 
Not a good combination. Not in my house.

I don't believe that Anne has ever put anyone down for using aversives, but she HAS asked, why not try an Easy Walk Harness BEFORE a prong or a shock collar.  I highly doubt that Anne is judging me or thinks less of me as a human being for resorting to a prong with Thor.  I did what I needed to do in order to walk him on lead after all else positive failed.  And it likely failed because I did it wrong.  But, I'm human and I never claimed to be perfect and Thor wasn't harmed by the use of a prong.
 
I would expect someone like Anne to be able to train a perfect recall without a shock collar.  She's a pro.  The point I was making is that I, a non expert, non trainer type, have also been able to train a perfect recall without a shock collar, and I've got some pretty drivey dogs who have some pretty high prey drive.  And for sharing my story, I basically get accused of lying about the wildlife we see.
 
Heck, my Mom and sister live in the biggest town in this area.  Ridiculously tiny lots, houses almost close enough to share toilet paper out the bathroom windows, and yet this summer the deer were eating my sisters veggie garden.  Most every morning they would be out there helping themselves to breakfast.  Sis was not amused.
 
I'm sorry, but it seems to me that the CM fans are the ones that started flinging mud, calling names, trying to make those of us who don't agree with his methods feel like less of a leader and likening us to treat dispensing butler/roommate types.  That's somehow ok but asking why not use something less aversive first is not?  That's a mud slinging attack making you feel like you are cruel and don't love your dog?  I just don't understand the purpose of going immediately to aversives...nor do I understand the high on the neck placement of the prong or choker where it is going to cause more pain......to ME training my dogs isn't about beating them into submission or causing them enough pain that they see me as the leader because I'm the one who can hurt them.....that just doesn't make sense to me.
 
But, I haven't called any of those type trainers a liar and implied that what THEY claim to see in the woods is impossible.  I've shared in email with more than one person on this board the stuff we've seen in the woods....I guess I just lie a LOT. []

I just want to add this food for thought. 
 
While I don't use a choke collar or anything like that I am still a huge Cesar fan. 
 
The things he talks about regarding how dogs think is very accurate.  His show is not worthless if you are not going to use a choke collar or his other techniques.  A great deal of what he says about pack mentality, leadership, when to show affection and when not too, what types of exercise are best, how to use your body to "block" certain unwanted behaviors, how to treat your dog like a dog and not a human etc. etc.  are very important bits of information. 
 
I've come away with lots of great advice from watching his show.  And, all of these things involve no touching of the dog at all. 
 
 

ORIGINAL: willowchow

I just want to add this food for thought. 

While I don't use a choke collar or anything like that I am still a huge Cesar fan. 

The things he talks about regarding how dogs think is very accurate.  His show is not worthless if you are not going to use a choke collar or his other techniques.  A great deal of what he says about pack mentality, leadership, when to show affection and when not too, what types of exercise are best, how to use your body to "block" certain unwanted behaviors, how to treat your dog like a dog and not a human etc. etc.  are very important bits of information. 

I've come away with lots of great advice from watching his show.  And, all of these things involve no touching of the dog at all. 

Yes, he's mostly about teaching the owners to use the "social" dynamic to communicate with their dogs and getting them to understand how we are being "read" by the dog with a dog's mind. He works by directing and instructing the dog as the dog's leader before a behavior occurs or escalates in many situations.

Even when he is physical, if you can think outside of the "training box" there is more being done with the leash than just the correction aspect. He also contains, redirects, and communicates with the leash and also through physical touch, eye contact, and body positioning. But if all you can see is the leash pops or how he handles an out of control dog in order to help that dog, then you're missing the big picture. The initial handling of these dogs is very brief and the dogs do turn around very quickly. The owners are the most work, as always.

Some might argue that a brief moment of stress is far kinder than letting a dog live in confusion or fear while their behavior is being shaped and conditioned. Dogs are perfectly capable of understanding direct communication and instruction.

I went to a seminar hosted by Cheri Lucas, who credits him with turning her shelter around and through his work and help has placed thousands of dogs. She also has a huge pack and at the time of the seminar had stated she has never put a dog down. Cesar recently donated $30,000 to her shelter.

His co-author Melissa Jo Peltier has stated that she has recieved tens of thousands of testimonials and case histories from owners, vets, and trainers in support and thanks for the work Cesar is doing.

His philosophy is spot-on, IMO. I wonder how I was able to use similar techniques with my own terrified dog without supressing her or shutting her down?

I have no problem with those who chose to use primarily positive reinforcement and training with dogs. I have a big problem with the bad behavior of people at the extreme end of the "Positive Only" spectrum who have done nothing but attack, condem, and smear him from every angle based on personal agendas, money, fear, ignorance, and a need to control what others think and do with their own dogs. It's like some sort of holy war.

Willowchow,

I'm convinced my dog would not have made it out of the shelter either.

I'm convinced my dog would not have made it out of the shelter either.

 
I'm saying that Willow would of never even been considered for adoption.  You got your dog from a shelter.  Willow would not have made it to the adoption process. 

Angelique--
 
Comparing  positive training to a holy war is a stretch. Goodness. Let's face it, lots of dogs are being trained; lots also aren't. My CM-like class that I attended is always full, so there is that going on. The +R one that I recently attended is about half the size it could be. There is that, too.
 
CM's book has been on the top selling list for quite some time, so he's making money. And the reason his show isn't off NG? It's making money for that company. Marketing smarketing--yeah, Dog Fancy uses treats and clickers (or "yes") when showing new techniques, but let's face it, CM's making a pretty darn good salary for himself.

ORIGINAL: willowchow

I'm saying that Willow would of never even been considered for adoption.  You got your dog from a shelter.  Willow would not have made it to the adoption process. 

 
Sounds like the initial screening process would have been the end. 
 
I'm glad Willow is with you. [] 

ORIGINAL: Angelique


I have no problem with those who chose to use primarily positive reinforcement and training with dogs. I have a big problem with the bad behavior of people at the extreme end of the "Positive Only" specrum who have done nothing but attack, condem, and smear him from every angle based on personal agendas, money, fear, ignorance, and a need to control what others think and do with their own dogs. It's like some sort of holy war.

 
I agree 100%, i admit that i attack back but ONLY after the misinterpretations of behaviorists methods start making them looking like medieval methods, i defend what i think is working for me and also without harming the dog, you can go to any thread where heated conversations take place and see that only when behaviorist techniques are being attacked is when everything start

ORIGINAL:mrv:Yes I use aversives, I try very hard to keep them at an absolute minimum.  I try very hard to never use them in the establishment of a behavior.  I try to use them in a very limited manner once behavior is established.  But some times I get it wrong.  I need to be able to step back evaluate and start again.  I think some of these posts do not foster that option in people.  So although we agree in some cases, we dont in others.  What's more, that is ok.

Beautifuly said mrv you took the words right out of my month.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs:What amazes me about the number of responses on this particular thread is the number who think they need to defend aversives.

mrv said it best --

: mrv: I think what gets this topic going and keeps it going are the statements that are perceived as  condemning (about training practices) and imply that some one may not care or love their animals as much as some one else.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs: We all claim to love dogs, but insist they need physical correction right from the get go??? 

  

This is one of those quotes that could be erceived as  condemning (about training practices) and imply that some one may not care or love their animals as much as erhaps those who use all positive. 

I don't have a problem with aversives if they're humane, properly applied, and on a dog with a temperament that is not damaged by them.

 
Exactly!!

I was asked yesterday, if my dogs are so well behaved, why do I only take three at a time when we go out in the fields and woods off lead.  The answer of course was lack of confidence in MY abilities.  However, that question got me thinking.
 
So, today I decided to give it a try.  Not very smart considering that I'm injured and moving about as quick as a 95 year old man with a broken walker.... but what the heck.  All six went out with me alone and we walked about 5 miles through the woods and fields.  No deer sightings today, just turkeys, but recall was still perfect.  There was a split second delay in returning to me and I could tell they were wondering if everyone ELSE was going to come back before THEY did, but it was just a split second.
 
We met the man who owns the deer blind with a WOOD STOVE so he can stay warm while he waits for some hapless deer to wander by.....put the dogs in a sit/stay for a few minutes and then released them to run in the field.  Same thing...no more than 50 feet away before they would turn and come back.....this fellow had been watching me work with them in the fields and was impressed that a "little thing like me" could handle that much dog off lead.  I never touched the drag lines EXCEPT when we were leaving our yard and were fairly close to the road.  Coming BACK tho, I simply directed them to "go to the gate" and every single one of them went directly to the gate.  Never needed to raise my voice one time.  THEY passed with flying colors, and happily, so did I! []
 
And nope, I didn't even consider taking the camera today since I had so many dogs on my own.

ORIGINAL: Angelique

ORIGINAL: willowchow

I just want to add this food for thought. 

While I don't use a choke collar or anything like that I am still a huge Cesar fan. 

The things he talks about regarding how dogs think is very accurate.  His show is not worthless if you are not going to use a choke collar or his other techniques.  A great deal of what he says about pack mentality, leadership, when to show affection and when not too, what types of exercise are best, how to use your body to "block" certain unwanted behaviors, how to treat your dog like a dog and not a human etc. etc.  are very important bits of information. 

I've come away with lots of great advice from watching his show.  And, all of these things involve no touching of the dog at all. 

It's like some sort of holy war.

 
[sm=rofl.gif]  So what does that make CM--the second coming?  Should we expect him to at any moment be dragged through the streets by clickers trainers and beaten with treat bags before an angry mob? [sm=rofl.gif]
 
I agree with some of the guys principles, that that's a massive stretch your taking there.  Like it was mentioned above, it's not like CM is wanting for anything at this point in time. 

ORIGINAL: nfowler

I think the way you train is very closely connected to the way you are as a person. Really. People who are hands-on trainers, physical, are probably that way in all other aspects of their lives. There are people who are quick to make negative comments at work, and those who aren't. Those who are quick to give a little swat to their kids, and those who aren't. It's within our personalitites.

That is so true and I've been saying similar things. It's just not in me to use aversives without trying a gentler method first. That's just me.

That's just it Glenda, they don't care about our proof or examples

 
Who's "they"?? 
 

...but have you ever heard any of the other crowd say hmmm ,maybe I'll give it a try, if not for anything else but to prove us treat dispensing butler/roommate types wrong!

 
Who's "the other crowd"??   Making blanket statements about a group of people you clearly don't care for is bothersome.  I don't like when words and/or thoughts are put into my mouth.  I like CM, so I guess I'm part of "the other crowd" you are referring to. 
 
Have you read "Cesar's Way" to educate yourself about his methods?  I personally have read many books from +R trainers along with CW.  If you could just get past the "hanging of Jindo" analogy, you might be able to take something positive away from his methods.  And, btw...Jindo is still a part of that family and lives indoors with them as a pet.  They decided to keep him instead of adopting him out because they became so attached.  So, the "hanging of Jindo" wasn't as evil as it is constantly portrayed.
 
I think both sides of the training coin have to be fair.