I don't understand why...

Liesje, perhaps you should have taught him from day one not to counter surf......lol...j/k

I see no other way of teaching a dog not to do that ....it is highly effective and does not make a dog owner a lazy one when using this method. I used a noise aversion to teach Huskies from chasing cats.

snownose

Liesje, perhaps you should have taught him from day one not to counter surf......lol...j/k

I see no other way of teaching a dog not to do that ....it is highly effective and does not make a dog owner a lazy one when using this method. I used a noise aversion to teach Huskies from chasing cats.

I think that's essentially what it is.  He's VERY handler soft, so a stern "no!" is all it takes for him, plus I don't want to overdo it and scare him.  If he was really bad about it I'd probably be shaking the soda can with change like we did for the cats. Since he can be quite soft if I have to correct for checking the counter, I have him do something else really simple and reward him for that so he feels smart again.   He really does live to please, but I mean he's a big dog and he loves food, I can't blame him for that or punish him for not knowing that humans don't take all the food they can get, so he's gotta learn somehow that the counter is not a good place to look.  I'm not angry with him for checking the counter and I try to never ever correct out of anger.  Honestly I don't really care since I rarely every have food out anyway, but I know on our vacation there will be lots of people who aren't used to having dogs around and they will leave food all over and get mad at Coke if he goes for it.  Mostly I will be supervising him and managing it so he doesn't get the change to take something but it would also be nice to slowly train him that the counter is MY space.  We've pretty much trained him that he can't go in the bathroom or the basement so I know he can do it, but with those spaces as well we had to use some verbal/noise corrections to show him where the boundary is.

CoBuHe

Dog_ma

I also don't have herding breeds, who might appreciate more specific input on what to do - I have relatively independent dogs.

I have a young herding dog who is not just relatively independant; but very independent.  I could have the wrong perception...but your statement sounded to me as herding dogs can't be independent.  Sorry if I misunderstood.

What I meant by independent is not having much desire or instinct to work closely with people. And I wasn't insulting herding dogs! I don't own any, but from what I understand herding dogs like having tasks and jobs. Sasha is middle of the road in terms of how closely she likes to work with a person, and Eko is way over on the "You want me to do something???" end.  I was using dependence/independence as a measure of biddability and a desire to actively work with a person.

I'm not so sure I agree with the statement of humans having more detailed wishes.  Usually, its pretty cut and dry with interruptions:  "don't do that,"  "go find something else to do."  My dog is a pet, not a working dog...so I have no problem with her making her own decision in finding something else to do.  Typically, she does make good alternative decisions, because in the big scheme things she wants to please.  Like you point out though...it depends on the particular dog.

"Detailed wishes" meaning I have more things I care about Eko (or any other dog) not doing than Sasha does. Sasha's list of no-no's is relatively short, and relate primarily to her body and things she may be consuming. Her food bowl is a biggie, and she does get tired of him whining. Other than that, she doesn't care if he chews the curtains, digs holes in the back yard, shreds the toilet paper,  chases the cat, eats my daughter's toys ... the list goes on.

Liesje, I use a similar technique with my dogs. Eko is a work in progress, but Sasha is so good now because of that approach, she will come find me upstairs and "ask" if I can give her my the food my daughter left on the table, in full reach.

She knows I don't want her taking it, and she knows that if she behaves nicely she has a high chance of getting a yummy and having a happy owner. And rather than me becoming the enemy or something negative, I'm a positive thing and the source of yummies. A few "no's" don't ruin a dog when they're used as a teaching tool and not a chance to yell at the bad dog.

snownose

spiritdogs

I didn't always have my clicker and a bag of beef while training my dogs, but it doesn't take much to toss a few Cheerios in your pocket when you go out for a walk.  Some people are too lazy to do even that.  But, they always have time for the rationalization. 

 

You know with this type of attitute you will  be stepping on someone's toes.

You might find it interesting with your great knowledge that some dogs when highly excited or anxious won't even take a treat.....they don't want to have anything to do with food. I really would like to see a dog that would prefer eating a Cheerio over wanting to sniff something way more interesting .

Also, I really don't see how a verbal, then calling a dog and praising a dog is doing all kinds of damage........but, I am sure in your eyes it probably does.

I don't see where spiritdogs has implied that? 

In any case, I see where she is coming from completely.... but its not me she needs to educate IMO.  Nor is it you!  MY point is that focusing on what people are doing wrong in the training class is not helpful.... Just as focusing on what your dog (or child or husband) is doing wrong is not all that helpful. 

For spiritdogs to raise this issue here tells me its at the forefront of her mind... and not rarely.  Now if you were teaching a dog "down" and he didn't do it immediately, having the fact that "he didn't do it!" at the front of your mind does not help you to teach him to do it! 

Her entire philosophy of teaching dogs (please correct me if i am wrong SD) is to jolly well FIND something to reward for!  In her efforts to educate people here, I don't see that happening very often..... her teaching within THIS group is very much correction-based from what I have seen, which I find surprising given that thats not how I imagine her "canine teaching" to be like. 

spiritdogs

 Sometimes, the laziness comes after they get the information about how to deal. 

Really?  It's not just a case of "old habits die hard"?  Would you expect a dog to be trained overnight?  Would you accuse HIM of being lazy if you'd been over the lesson once already?  Or would you break it down into smaller chunks that he could understand?

You seem pretty accomplished at dog training.... why are you falling down with people training?  Are they really that different?  Come on - be honest - do you ever find yourself thinking that folks are wasting your time, blowing you off, deliberately ignoring you?  And if it were a dog, would you not banish those thoughts that put the blame on the dog for not listening, shoulder the responsibility, take a step back and think, does he really UNDERSTAND what I am trying to say? 

ETA - people, as a rule, don't like being told they are "doing it wrong".  Even - or I should say "especially" - if they are giving you money for your knowledge. 

Chuffy

falling down with people training?  Are they really that different?  Come on - be honest - do you ever find yourself thinking that folks are wasting your time, blowing you off, deliberately ignoring you

Let me step in queue and say yes. Humans are different than dogs and are much harder to train than dogs. Dogs are always behaving as dogs. It's getting a human to change viewpoints or reach an understanding that can be a quixotic challenge. (I can still hear Peter O'Toole singing.)

Maybe I'm crazy but I don't doubt SD's experience or credentials. Her statements reek of logic and math, if you'll pardon my metaphor. What she says adds up, so to speak. Nor do I doubt that she is human and sometimes experiences the challenges of dealing with humans. I also know that frustration (and I'm not necessarily referring to this forum.) I've yet to find something of hers that is wrong, and I used to disagree or at least not agree with her plenty, before. I am neither president or member of the SD fan club, if there is one. As some of you may well know by now, I say what I know or think regardless of what it costs me. ( I don't know what I do to deserve such blatant attacks of honesty. I bathe regularly, brush and floss my teeth, etc.)

Chuffy

ETA - people, as a rule, don't like being told they are "doing it wrong". 

I've been told many times that I was wrong and I didn't like it. And learned from it, as several times, I was, indeed, wrong. And I also have a habit of admitting when I am wrong, which makes me different than a lot of people. Many people, when told they are wrong, get their back up. Which doesn't lead to learning. And there were times before when SD told me I was wrong, and others could have implied such. And I survived it, not much worse for the wear. If someone didn't tell me when I was doing something wrong, how would I know any better, other than by hard trial and error?

Or is it that it's okay for people to "correct" dogs but not to "correct" other humans? That's an interesting dichotomy.

I've been in this forum longer than most of the people in this thread and SD has, if anything, cut back her posts. But she has always shot straight from the hip. The only thing we can control is how we react.

Now, don't make me whip out the chocolate.

And, BTW, the blonde jokes were great. I'm enjoying them too much to be offended, dang it.

ron2

Chuffy

falling down with people training?  Are they really that different?  Come on - be honest - do you ever find yourself thinking that folks are wasting your time, blowing you off, deliberately ignoring you

Let me step in queue and say yes. Humans are different than dogs and are much harder to train than dogs. Dogs are always behaving as dogs. It's getting a human to change viewpoints or reach an understanding that can be a quixotic challenge. (I can still hear Peter O'Toole singing.)

Maybe I'm crazy but I don't doubt SD's experience or credentials. Her statements reek of logic and math, if you'll pardon my metaphor. What she says adds up, so to speak. Nor do I doubt that she is human and sometimes experiences the challenges of dealing with humans. I also know that frustration (and I'm not necessarily referring to this forum.) I've yet to find something of hers that is wrong, and I used to disagree or at least not agree with her plenty, before. I am neither president or member of the SD fan club, if there is one. As some of you may well know by now, I say what I know or think regardless of what it costs me. ( I don't know what I do to deserve such blatant attacks of honesty. I bathe regularly, brush and floss my teeth, etc.)

Chuffy

ETA - people, as a rule, don't like being told they are "doing it wrong". 

I've been told many times that I was wrong and I didn't like it. And learned from it, as several times, I was, indeed, wrong. And I also have a habit of admitting when I am wrong, which makes me different than a lot of people. Many people, when told they are wrong, get their back up. Which doesn't lead to learning. And there were times before when SD told me I was wrong, and others could have implied such. And I survived it, not much worse for the wear. If someone didn't tell me when I was doing something wrong, how would I know any better, other than by hard trial and error?

Or is it that it's okay for people to "correct" dogs but not to "correct" other humans? That's an interesting dichotomy.

I've been in this forum longer than most of the people in this thread and SD has, if anything, cut back her posts. But she has always shot straight from the hip. The only thing we can control is how we react.

Now, don't make me whip out the chocolate.

And, BTW, the blonde jokes were great. I'm enjoying them too much to be offended, dang it.

 

Thanks, Ron.  I'm sure it hasn't occurred to anyone but you maybe, but I don't know why there is an assumption that I would treat clients in the ways that people have suggested here.  My musings are within my head, not flowing out of my mouth during class, or a consultation, for gosh sake.  But, this is a different medium - it's a place where people discuss, debate, and, well, rant about things dog.  I got more heat for this one than has lately been paid to people with pregnant dogs or who are feeding Beneful.  Ah, the joys of forum life.  Believe it or not, one member here has actually had a personal consultation with me, and I must not have peeved her very much because she was gracious enough to give me a gift afterward.  (Which I love and still wear.)  So, I appreciate if people would not put words into my mouth in that way.

Blonde joke special for you, Ron:

Q: Why are blonde jokes so simple?

A: So the brunettes can understand them.  

Now, where's my Godiva??? 

snownose

spiritdogs

But, getting the dog to perform an alternative behavior is the object ("leave it" or "come";) rather than simply to prevent the dog from doing the incorrect behavior and being confused about what TO do. 

 

I must be dense when it comes to this, and sorry if it feels like I keep harping at the same thing. I really don't agree that the dog should have to perform an alternative behavior......once told to stop, and the dog moves on to something else isn't that what was expected out of the dog? In the past when I have given a verbal and I don't need the dog to come to me the dog just moves on and that's that. Dogs correct each other and after that the same thing happens...the offending dog just moves on.

The alternative behavior does not have to be "come", it could be "sit" or "down" or even "go play" - virtually any other behavior the dog knows.  I think that we just have two different philosophies on how to train dogs, and so you tell your dog to stop doing something, and I simply tell my dogs to do something (which just happens to be incompatible with the behavior that I wanted them to stop).  It's really just the difference between having a dog that obeys because he gets corrected if he doesn't, and one that obeys because the handler is constantly reinforcing acceptable behaviors and allowing the unacceptable behaviors to extinguish, or substituting appropriate behaviors in place of them.  And, it's also like Republicans and Democrats, men and women, pro life and pro choice.  They simply have a different world view.

ron2

Maybe I'm crazy but I don't doubt SD's experience or credentials.

Neither do I

ron2

Nor do I doubt that she is human and sometimes experiences the challenges of dealing with humans.

Which was why I was tentatively offering suggestions that might help with those challenges.

ron2

And I also have a habit of admitting when I am wrong, which makes me different than a lot of people. Many people, when told they are wrong, get their back up. Which doesn't lead to learning.

Yes!  That is EXACTLY my point

ron2

If someone didn't tell me when I was doing something wrong, how would I know any better, other than by hard trial and error?

Ah, now here we get to the nub, crux and heart of the matter.... you have said that she told you plenty of times that you were wrong before.  Why did she tell you plenty of times?  Why did she not only need to tell you once, if her what she says is so logical?  Was it because you didn't like being told you were wrong either?  What she was saying didn't fit with what you "knew" at the time, so you discarded it.

It wasn't SD telling you that you were WRONG that got through to you.  It was SD telling you, please correct me if I am wrong, to try something different.  TO DO something.  THAT'S what did it in the end.

So you are not QUITE as different from the rest of us as you'd like to think.... you too learned by the same basic principles as everyone else.

- - - -

Just going back to the topic of corrections for a moment - I have used mild "corrections" (see my earlier definition) in my day to day living with the dogs, but never during an actual training session when I am trying to teach a specific behaviour.  I find that corrections are usually unnecessary at best in that environment.

spiritdogs

Thanks, Ron.  I'm sure it hasn't occurred to anyone but you maybe, but I don't know why there is an assumption that I would treat clients in the ways that people have suggested here. 

I am talking mostly about the way that you address people here... the general tone of it is often "what not to do".  I can't fault your facts or logic, 9 chances out of 10 I'll probably agree with every word.  But if I already agree, then you're not really speaking for my benefit, but for those who DON'T know, for those who need the education you have to offer.  I can't speak to how you address your clients, other than to say if it is like how to address people here, then maybe that's why they seem lazy or stupid to you.... because there must be a reason you are not getting through to them?

OTOH hand, if you are here only to rant and not to help folks, (and that's fine too, because we aren't paying you or anything) then ignore every word as what I am saying is entirely irrelevant!  

Chuffy

Which was why I was tentatively offering suggestions that might help with those challenges.

And, sometimes, those other humans are wrong and one must simply tell them so.

Chuffy

Why did she tell you plenty of times?  Why did she not only need to tell you once, if her what she says is so logical?  Was it because you didn't like being told you were wrong either?  What she was saying didn't fit with what you "knew" at the time, so you discarded it.

Plenty of times doesn't denote the same item of discussion. Wrong on different things at different times. And, no, I don't like being told I am wrong, either. And what I knew at the time wasn't enough. And just because it "didn't fit with what I knew" does not give my viewpoint validity nor does it require someone to be careful about my feelings.  That is, "what I knew" wasn't enough. Could it hurt my feelings if you or someone had said, "you don't know enough"? Possibly and I don't have any particular liking for being told I am wrong. But It wouldn't change the fact that I was wrong or deficient in my understanding before. Are you getting it at all? There are some things that just "are", no matter who's feelings get hurt and one can bang their head against a brick wall in any futile manner, wishing otherwise.

There is a body of scientific knowledge and understanding that is observable and repeatable that most decidedly does not equal any one person's intuition. Nor do I think SD spends all of her time ranting or having a low opinion of those with less training and understanding than herself. How do you dress up telling someone they are wrong? "My, that's a lovely outfit. You might be wrong about (topic x,y, or z) but your sense of fashion is spot on."

Are you not, in so many ways, trying to tell me I'm wrong, or that my statements are wrong or inaccurate? Or that you are trying to "correct" SD, with recognized experience and creds in her field? Granted, creds and experience help each other but which is more important? An always pleasant person who is wrong most of the time or one who is usually right, tries to be pleasant and runs into that human stubbornness of not backing down, especially if their feelings are hurt because someone else actually knows more than them?

Maybe it's because of how I was raised. Again, upbringing has its effect. Being wrong is not the end of the world, necessarily. The only stupid question is the one that you don't ask. Anything worth doing is worth doing right. An addition to that was that if you can't do it right, get out of the way so that the person who can do it right and get in there and do it. How I felt about being told I was wrong or realizing that I was wrong was secondary to learning what was right. Which doesn't stop me from being ignorant about something or having the same resistance as others to being told I am wrong. And if I am wrong, I am wrong. And I can blow my nose and dab my eyes and get over it. Or as my mom put it, "if you want to cry, I will give you something to cry about."

...because there must be a reason you are not getting through to them?

Funny, our lovely Kim MacMillan, ever so polite, and so willing to explain her positions, and even video tape them, still didn't get through to many people who wanted to remain convinced of their opinions.   Whether you like me or my style has little to do with whether I'm right, and at least I didn't make any personal attacks on this thread because I was speaking in the colloquial sense.  You aren't so much offering constructive criticism as you are jumping on a bandwagon that has been rolling around this forum for a long time.  Isn't it better to stick to why "people" get frustrated or do one thing or another, than it is to hound someone who was having one bad day for the next however many days this thread has refused to die?

To be honest, while I was certainly persistent with Ron, and challenged his belief system, I think that he would be the first person I'd pin a medal on here for having the guts to reflect on what he was being told and at least make an honest attempt to see if there was any validity to what I was saying, regardless how he might have felt about me personally at the time.  Believe me, I didn't go down to Texas to twist his arm, but I did not back down from a position that I thought would help him and his dog.  Here, we were friendly, and maybe sometimes, not so friendly debaters (that's for him to say).  I just know that he earned my respect for being open-minded, and that would have been the case even if he had told me that he tried my suggestion and didn't care for it.  I don't have any malice in my soul toward anyone here, even the ones that occasionally tick me off, and regardless of the owners, I have a deep concern for all the dogs here.  I realize that even people with whom I'm very friendly here don't know me, and might not choose to be my friend in person.  So, I take all with a grain of salt, and don't worry if they take me in a way that is not quite accurate.  Cyberspace isn't for the fainthearted sometimes.  That's because none of us has control over who comes and goes here.  There are some that I have been grateful to find in other places once they've left, and some that I am glad I never ran across again.  Some people here are very special to me, even if they don't know it. But, it's not real life.  I still have to get up from this chair and tend my terminally ill boyfriend, and I still have to haul grain out to the barn, and I still have to go to work when I feel like pulling the covers over my head and listening to the rain drops hit the window.  This is a place I come to for - well, lately, I don't really know...

ron2

Are you not, in so many ways, trying to tell me I'm wrong, or that my statements are wrong or inaccurate? Or that you are trying to "correct" SD, with recognized experience and creds in her field?

You have not yet said a single point I disagree with.  SD doesn't raise many points I disagree with either, so I am not actually telling either of you that you are wrong.  I was merely making a suggestion.  Here it is again: PERHAPS her clients would learn the new, better way faster if less "correction" were involved. 

Now if there is already minimal correction, and that unavoidable, then I am out of suggestions! 

It's not about hurt feelings Ron.  It's not just about "people getting their backs up".  That's a part of it.  But a larger part is, as it always is.... HOW animals (including humans) learn.  Corrections only stop behaviour, right?  It's good ole PR that actually teaches desired behaviour.  And no, I'm not talking about dogs at this moment in time.

You get what you reinforce, not what you want - right?  And sometimes, drawing attention to something reinforces it. Example - SD has mentioned prongs in this thread.  Drawing attention to them.  Alright, she may be saying that they are NOT her preferred equipment, but there will still be folks that see all this talk about prongs and go out and buy one.  That's a simplified version of it, but do you get my meaning?  Any attention is still attention and attention is often reinforcing.  (No, I'm still not talking about dogs )

If a dog can learn with minimal correction - which I think SD does believe - and we are meant to be more intelligent, surely we can learn that way too?  So if a dog doesn't HAVE to be told when he is getting it wrong, then does a human HAVE to be told that?  And why?

And what about my earlier point, which I don't think was addressed - why is it that if a dog doesn't get something right away even after you have gone to great pains to teach him, SD's first question is most probably: does he REALLY understand what I am asking?  Yet, humans don't learn right away and they are "lazy".  Do you see?  I am not suggesting for a second that she TELLS her client that.  But she has stated quite plainly tha's what she thinks.  That is surely not a helpful mindset?

 

spiritdogs

Funny, our lovely Kim MacMillan, ever so polite, and so willing to explain her positions, and even video tape them, still didn't get through to many people who wanted to remain convinced of their opinions. 

Yes, I noticed that too.  You win   I was only sharing my thoughts.... and if you really think *I* was attacking you, then say so and I'll go back and delete every post.  None of it was meant to be hurtful in any way, and I mean that very sincerely. 

spiritdogs

....having the guts to reflect on what he was being told and at least make an honest attempt to see if there was any validity to what I was saying

That is an admirable trait indeed.  And I agree that Ron seems to be a rare and precious breed.