The Alpha Roll--purpose and effectiveness?

spiritdogs

Maybe we should not have been discussing the "original technique" at all then, although I certainly defer to sillysally's right to start threads on whatever topic she wants. 

I wonder how many people who posted never actually read the original post (on page 1 of this thread) and the OP's description of holding the dog on it's side for vet treatment purposes .

Given the content of the original post (on page 1 of this thread), I can only imagine that posts about some kind of old school violent smash down have more to do with stuff that this thread is not about rather than stuff that this thread is about.

lostcoyote

i will repeat it once more just in case you missed it... otherwise, i will assume that your silence speaks volumes and that you would agree that objects do not possess intent:

There's no point in repeating it. The only "volume" I'm speaking is that fact that it's off-topic, and not to be responded to. If you really want to know the answer, you can PM me about it. The only reason I'm even posting here is that you seem to have missed the post asking for OT things to be taken off-post. I am doing that, or at least trying to. From here on out, though, I will not be responding to anything OT on the thread, unless it pertains to the procedure itself.

Cassidys Mom

I absolutely disagree that some dogs won't respond to any kind of positive training. Motivational training is used on very tough, very hard dogs for all kinds of police work, from taking down criminals, to drug detection work. One of the moderators on my GSD board has been raising, importing, and training police dogs for decades. That doesn't mean she won't occasionally "tie a knot in a dog's tail", as she puts it, (figuratively of course), but intially all training is motivational, usually using toys as a reward.

There are also many people very active in rescue on the board, people dealing with dogs with incredible issues, multi-dog packs of their own, with fosters coming and going all the time, a very delicate balance. I have the utmost respect for these people and their methods, which DO work, and are almost entirely positive, with occasional corrections as needed.
 

I am so greatful that you and the other members of your advertised board have never had a problem......is there a way I can join that oh, so happy and perfect doggy and rescue world? It sounds to be a gem.....never any major problems.....just perfect.....

Before you judge my intentions for any kind of training and rescue, I will give you a little detail....this summer we drove to Ohio and picked up a Husky hours away from being gassed......we didn't know anything about this dog, he had not been tested for behavior issues.....he was straight out of the pound.......that's it....that is how I rescue........very difficult dogs that have not been tested in most cases.....

I'm finding it difficult to get my mind around the idea that 'tough' dogs DON'T respond to positive methods. It was the tough dogs my mother ended up with that turned her ONTO positive methods. The dogs that didn't like physical corrections, or that hadn't been properly socialised as youngsters, or the one with no bite inhibition.

Call me blind and narrow-minded, but it has been my experience that any animal will respond to positive methods if you are patient enough. I once saw a cat on Barking Mad that had grown up on the streets and was then taken in by a person. She was quite wild and wouldn't even show herself if someone was in the room with her. They built a relationship slow and steady with food and no eye contact and endless patience. Maybe I'm just not understanding how an aggressive dog is any different to a wild animal. Could someone straighten this out for me, perhaps? Is there a difference? I just can't imagine why an animal wouldn't respond to positive methods. Even my hare, who can't be relied upon to work for anything in particular, has responded wonderfully to positive methods. A couple of times he's been forced by someone other than me and it's cost me months of work with him. I have enough money in the trust bank to force him when I have to, though.

Yes, some dogs are tough and need to learn you mean business. But doesn't every puppy go through a stage where they need to learn you mean business? Is physically forcing them to do something they don't want to do really the best way to tell them you mean to get your way? Lately I've discovered steady persistence to be quite an effective tool for getting stubborn animals to realise you care more about them doing this thing than they care about not doing it. I just don't know what kind of dog we're talking about here, that needs something like a pin or roll. I don't think pinning that tough puppy we had made any difference to him at all. It just protected my hands from his teeth until he gave up trying to bite. I think if we'd rolled or pinned him as an adult, it would have justified to him that there was something about people he should dislike and be wary of.

Corvus......as much as I appreciate your input, I really don't think you can apply your way to all situations.....trust me.....some dogs can be a real bad situation.....and most folks go straight for the "Putting the dog down"....I am for giving the animal a chance......

corvus

Call me blind and narrow-minded, but it has been my experience that any animal will respond to positive methods if you are patient enough.

I try as much positive training as possible....but, be assured some dogs won't have any part of it.....and since I run a tight ship and need to be able to find a new home, so, I can rescue another animal, time is really not on my side.......I don't have years to explore several options....with some dogs I do, most dogs get the best they can while here and then a home needs to be found........

Perhaps some folks really don't understand what I do, and at this point I really don't care anymore.....hack away on me all you want, I really don't care, I know what is in my heart, and I know what needs to be done at times............so, at this point I am done with all the so called "Perfect+R" folks......and I am going to continue my path of saving another life.............it might not be to your application of things.....but, I know I am doing things to make a difference.............

corvus

Call me blind and narrow-minded, but it has been my experience that any animal will respond to positive methods if you are patient enough.

Depends on what you mean by respond. Not many people will advocate taking say, a tiger cub and raising it as a house pet. Or a wolf cub. Yes, you can make amazing headway with tigers and wolves and all sort of wild animals if you are patient, use positive methods, and *have limited goals*.

And I love hearing about your hare, I really do - but a prey animal and a predator don't have the same instincts. A hare is infinitely safer a house companion than a wild predator. I appreciate what you've built with him.  I'm a woo-er of wild ones myself.  My cats are tamed wild cats. They aren't domesticated. And it works because they are small, independent, and not interested in a show down.

I worked my butt off with Ivan, all positive.  It wasn't until I had no other choice that I got harsher. I have lived it: there are dogs who do not respond *sufficiently* to positive methods. I don't think these are normal dogs, healthy dogs, or good pets.  But they exist. They aren't unicorns.  

Sorry Dogma, I didn't meant to ignore Ivan and dogs like him. I absolutely accept that dogs like Ivan exist and they don't necessarily respond to kindness. But, as you say, it may be that they're not normal or 'healthy'. I guess a more accurate thing for me to say is that any animal that CAN come to live safely within a human society will respond to positive methods and kindness with a bit of patience. Now, I also accept that some people's idea of a dog that can live safely with humans is rather different to my own. That's an argument for another thread. For example, as dearly as I love my hare I'd rather have him put to sleep than force him to live in a situation where he wasn't happy for a prolonged period. If I can't keep him calm about something than I find another way. That's all there is to it. I come back another day when he's feeling more co operative. I find a way that's less traumatic. I do it because I adore him and I care very much about keeping on his good side. I care very much about keeping on the good side of any animal people have to deal with every day.

I still don't see where an aggressive dog with a poor upbringing is different to a wild animal. Dogs are more able to hurt you than a hare for sure (although I've entertained the idea that Kit could disembowel me with those back legs of his!), and I think they're far more likely to swing towards aggression. However, a cow is more able to hurt you than a dog through sheer size. They take a lot before they rebel, but some are more sensitive than others and when they do rebel, they can deliver a pretty impressive kick, they can trample you, snag you with a horn, and crush you against a solid fence or wall. When a cow does something like that it's the same sort of thing that drives them than when my hare explodes and tries to flee for the hills inside a small room. From the few aggressive dogs I've met, the same sort of thing drives their aggressive behaviour as well. As long as fear is behind it, then I think patience and kindness is the key, regardless of the size of the animal or its capacity to hurt you. If it's big and powerful and unpredictable, you just act with more patience, more caution, and more respect for what it can do. There are always going to be limits to what you can achieve, just like with my hare, who is good around people he trusts, but is inherently afraid of strangers and hates being handled, and he will always be on the edge of flipping out in panic. If he bit instead of fled, I wouldn't have kept him because it would have been too dangerous. Yes, there are limits, but dogs are still animals and the flight of fight response is the same in any animal except for the likelihood of it being one over the other.

In this way, dogs that are aggressive for other reasons than fear however masked it may be, do not really fall under my umbrella of animals that patience and kindness will work wonders on. I have not met any dogs that did not have either fear or territoriality as the ultimate cause of their aggression. I do believe such dogs exist, but I believe they are very uncommon. I only have my own experiences to go by on that. I've met a lot of dogs, some of them have been aggressive, none of them have been aggressive for reasons other than fear or territoriality.

No snownose, I guess I don't really understand what you do. If you don't want to help me, I guess I'll just continue to misunderstand you.

That's all.

Snownose, just because I don't use an alpha roll and what I see as harsh methods, doesn't mean that I'm quick to rush a dog to the gas chamber.  I also don't have "all the time in the world" to get dogs rehabbed and ready for a new home. I have SIX large dogs of my own.  Perhaps my ship isn't run as tightly as yours, in that I could care less who goes through the door first so long as my physical body isn't in danger of being knocked over, but my crew do wait until they are told "go ahead" or "ok" be it a door or a stairway.  And then it's about MY physical safety, not who's the boss.  So my rules likely are more lax than are yours, but, the dogs I bring into my home as fosters learn quite quickly about following the rules and I haven't had to use physical force or violence to achieve that.

 Corvus, a cow is a domesticated animal. Not a wild animal. Wild water buffalo are known as one of the most dangerous animals out there.

Would you feel safe living with a wolf in your home?

My point is that the relationships we have with domesticated dogs, based on positive reinforcement and a shared life, are the result of species compatibility. You can't take any old animal and have a safe and pleasant house pet. I don't think the comparison of dogs to wild animals is valid.

snownose

I am so greatful that you and the other members of your advertised board have never had a problem......is there a way I can join that oh, so happy and perfect doggy and rescue world? It sounds to be a gem.....never any major problems.....just perfect.....

Before you judge my intentions for any kind of training and rescue, I will give you a little detail....this summer we drove to Ohio and picked up a Husky hours away from being gassed......we didn't know anything about this dog, he had not been tested for behavior issues.....he was straight out of the pound.......that's it....that is how I rescue........very difficult dogs that have not been tested in most cases.....

 *sigh*.... Here we go again. Please don't read things into my post that aren't there, and please don't assume that I'm judging your intentions, because I most certainly did not. 

I did not state that I, and the other members of my "advertised board" () have never had a problem - that's not true, and I have no idea how you managed to infer that from my post. What I SAID is that they, and I, dealt with problems with positive reinforcement, not physical displays of dominance. That's it. "Oh, so happy and perfect doggy and rescue world?" Give me a break - your nasty sarcasm is completely uncalled for and inappropriate.

I applaud your rescue efforts, truly. But just because other people deal with problems in a different way than you do is not an indictment of YOUR methods. There's no need to get so defensive about it - you disagree with my methods and I don't have a problem with that, nor do I take it personally.
 

corvus

I'm finding it difficult to get my mind around the idea that 'tough' dogs DON'T respond to positive methods.

corvus

Yes, some dogs are tough and need to learn you mean business. But doesn't every puppy go through a stage where they need to learn you mean business? Is physically forcing them to do something they don't want to do really the best way to tell them you mean to get your way? Lately I've discovered steady persistence to be quite an effective tool for getting stubborn animals to realise you care more about them doing this thing than they care about not doing it. I just don't know what kind of dog we're talking about here, that needs something like a pin or roll. I don't think pinning that tough puppy we had made any difference to him at all. It just protected my hands from his teeth until he gave up trying to bite. I think if we'd rolled or pinned him as an adult, it would have justified to him that there was something about people he should dislike and be wary of.

I totally agree with you corvus, particularly the part I put in bold. I just don't think it's conducive to establishing a relationship of trust and respect. Any dog that is so tough that they will not respond to positive methods are perhaps also so damaged that they cannot be rehabilitated enough to live safely in a home with people and maybe other animals.

I also agree with Dog_ma that sometimes positive methods are not sufficient, but that's where using the least amount of compulsion necessary comes in. Sometimes you DO need to use some, but if you start out with corrrections there's nowhere to go but to up corrections until they are more and more harsh, to the point where you can injure the dog at worst, and at best irreparably harm your relationship. If you start out positive, reinforcing behavior you want to encourage, you can usually use a much gentler correction to get the point across. With Cassidy, the absolute worst possible punishment was to be ignored. NOTHING had even remotely the effect on her that walking out of a room and closing the door, leaving her alone did. I could have put a prong on her and yanked the snot out of her, but if I could communicate my displeasure with her behavior and get immediate results because she SO GOT the point without even touching her, then why would I do it any other way? She learned to fear the consequences of her behavior, not to fear ME.

 But what the heck do I know about anything.

 

Cassidys Mom

corvus

it would have justified to him that there was something about people he should dislike and be wary of.

I totally agree with you corvus, particularly the part I put in bold.

This is an interesting point, and to blather on Ivan, he disliked people and was wary of them. Already. Whatever genetics he had combined with separation from mom and no proper early socialization left him convinced that people were sketchy.  He understood the world in terms of force. It was something. He seemed to divide the social world into 3 categories: those that can best me, those I can best, and those I'm not yet sure of. He would never, at any age, attack a dog or person that he believed could kick his rear.