# Tools Vs. Crutches!!!!



## James Downey

Okay so the people that use tables, e-collars, pinch collars. I have trained my 18 mos. old dog without a leash or a collar. even in tracking. Just because 2years ago I removed all correction collars. So I figure most trainers "add tools" when they cannot figure a problem out. So, I removed the tools. 



Just as the people who use them claim that they are tools and can be abused. That not having an understanding of thier application is what makes them a problem.

I can go one step further, and say that people who rely on the use of Tools may very well understand how to use them. and they may, but what my experience has taught me. is most people are introducing tools because they suck at controlling the dogs access to resources.


----------



## mike finn

Did it take you longer to train your dog this way? What are the advantages of training a dog this way? Do you get a better end product,or is this an ethical thing?


----------



## James Downey

mike finn said:


> Did it take you longer to train your dog this way? What are the advantages of training a dog this way? Do you get a better end product,or is this an ethical thing?


AHHHH.... You just alerted me to another crutch.... Instead of just trying it. We will just ask the guy who has already done it. 

Everyone is so scared to venture off the beaten path. Do something Dangerous Mike...throw the collars in the Garbage.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Same here James , 


Everyone is so scared to venture off the beaten path. Do something Dangerous James try the table.

I don't really mean that But you are assuming that people that do things different lack knowledge. Shame on you. 

Kuddos to you for your ability to train the way you do. 

Mike said, Did it take you longer to train your dog this way? What are the advantages of training a dog this way? Do you get a better end product,or is this an ethical thing? 

I too would like to know .


----------



## jamie lind

How many dogs have you trained this way? What have they accomplished?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

James,

You want to train with no collar and no leash? Knock yourself out.
However to think you're somehow superior to someone that likes to take advantage of modern training equipment is a egotistical.
Compare your dog to Bart Bellons who is the leader in e-collars and all sorts of aids and devices. Look at his webpage. Flex poles for tie backs, ball dropping devices for rewards, even a little ball cup that clips on your hat.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I don't think there is such a thing as with or without crutches.

I taught a dog not to go off hunting in the woods without using e-collar, line, etc. It took longer maybe but I think it was my pride that wouldn't let me allow crutches to get between me and my dog.

It worked 99% but I got to be able to read my dog by doing it. He would trot in front of me and if he looked right or left and back at me I would saay "no" and he trotted on in front of me. The only mistake I made once was by bending down to re-tie my boots. In these few seconds, the dog had looked behind, no command, and off!!!

When he started to chase, I "downed" him. His "down" was good. Afterwards, I called him in a friendly voice "here" and we carried on walking or biking (proved in one way easier, in another way harder).

As regards training with or without crutches, if it takes longer without, why not try. One certainly gets to be able to read the dog better without crutches but it can be a nerve-wracking experience for both without.

I know how to use the e-collar but have never used it on my dogs in training. However, I have used a sharpened prong.

*Sometimes* a crutch can be necessary to avoid a long and painful training without.


----------



## Brett Bowen

I have to say I somewhat agree with James. I fixed a lot of stuff OB wise with no collars, no leashes. Just me, the dog, and a toy in the front yard. I think it makes training easier because there are less things you as the handler has to worry about. Lets you concentrate on rewarding the correct behavior. 

That being said, I use a prong collar, mainly on training days as it's required to do bitework once the dog is passed a rag. But, it's rare that a prong correction is used anymore. Gave a light one last night, but before that it had to have been weeks and we train twice a week. Sometimes that's what is needed. I agree that some people start relying on whatever to get the results they want. 

Dogs really are very simple thinkers. We tend to complicate things.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

I am also interested in your observations and results, James. As this is a discussion board, I would assume you posted what you did to encourage discussion. 

I use whatever methods or tools I feel are appropriate for the dog I am working with and the task I am training for. Some dogs are naturally compliant and handler oriented and accept that you control how and when they receive reinforcement. Other dogs, by nature, are more independent and determined and thus, more inclinced to be stubborn, resistant or distracted. 

You said you trained completely without a leash or collar ...meaning no tethers used to restrain the dog whatsoever? I am curious if you trained protection work in this manner and what methods you used to limit access to the decoy. Also curious about how you would rate your dog's drive for food, toys, decoy, etc. and how your dog's drive to use his/her nose was naturally before you reinforced the behavior. Also, did you use aversives of any sort ...even so much as body language or verbal corrections (not just a "no, you're wrong marker" but something that the dog actually interpreted as aversive)? Finally, how would you compare this dog's performance to other dogs you have trained using "tools" or other dogs you have seen trained with "tools."

I am honestly interested as I really do prefer to let me dogs learn and understand what behaviors produce reinforcement instead of teaching them everything and controlling their behavior with leashes and collars. On the other hand, I do think tools are useful in manipulation the environment or limiting the dog's behavior in certain situation. I had much success with my older female malinois luring and rewarding behavior, using prong collars and e-collars and controlling her access to rewards. However, I wish I had allowed her to spend more time experimenting and offering behaviors rather than teaching her what I wanted. She has always been very willing to do whatever I ask, but very unwilling to try to figure out anything on her own when I'm in the picture. When I am not right there to help or guide, however, she is incredibly intelligent and great at problem solving. I did not make the same "mistakes" with my other dogs and saw results I was much happier with. I have incorporated as much operant conditioning into her training as I can and wait for her to figure things out whenever possible, but admittedly, I sometimes lack the time or patience to try to "retrain" a 7 year old dog. It is also frustrating and difficult to find a decoy willing to be patient and allow you to wait for your dog to offer the behavior you are looking for. What has your experience been with finding decoys or training directors who will accommodate your methods?


----------



## Geoff Empey

I think that many people do rely on tools, that I can agree on. Calling them crutches for lack of a better word I think is a bit harsh. My sport is done all off leash except for the heel on leash exercise, any thing and everything else is off leash, so we have to train for that goal and with that in mind every time we step on the field. 

Many wonder why their dogs are perfect in training and crash and burn during trial. I can tell it is relying to much on leash pressure from whatever tool in the box that you have been using. 

Being a dog trainer that can train control to a dog off leash without tools is a magician for sure. Even though in my sport it is all off leash we train mostly on leash but we also proof and train without. This includes at varying times to not include the other so-called crutch 'reward' as well as leash pressure from any tool i.e. prong, choke, e-collar etc. 

The way I see it, if you can't train a dog with a ball, baitbag and a flat collar. A prong or e-collar is not going to help you much any ways.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Gillian Schuler said:


> I taught a dog not to go off hunting in the woods without using e-collar, line, etc. It took longer maybe but I think it was my pride that wouldn't let me allow crutches to get between me and my dog.


Pride. The biggest crutch of all.


----------



## James Downey

So I take it, you all don't agree. You are good at controlling the resources, can create the behaviors you need for the work with out tools.....But yet, decide to use them?


----------



## mike finn

Your not going to answer my questions are you?


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Convenience or death


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Pride. The biggest crutch of all.


I wouldn't say so - pride in one's training or work is something good in my mind.


----------



## Brian McQuain

Gillian Schuler said:


> I wouldn't say so - pride in one's training or work is something good in my mind.


 
Unless the training or work is subpar and produces little to nothing, and the prideful one isnt willing to improve upon the work, because in his/her mind, nothing needs improving.


----------



## Nicole Stark

James Downey said:


> So I take it, you all don't agree. You are good at controlling the resources, can create the behaviors you need for the work with out tools.....But yet, decide to use them?


I don't necessarily disagree though I'd never be so bold and refer to the tools others use as crutches. However, in my case the work I was doing with my snipe early on was a specific kind of "control" with resources that fostered behaviors you wouldn't necessarily want to develop in a sport dog. In otherwords it was intentional on my part as I wasn't looking to develop/raise a sport dog.

Much of my OB work is and has been done off lead and without "crutches"; however, because of the statement I made above and other reasons that I do not wish to elaborate upon in a public forum I made a choice to use certain tools to faciliate specific aspects of her work as she progressed in her training. Certainly I had other options, we all do. I simply chose not to utilize them.

I'd be happy to clarify via PM if you want to know why that is.


----------



## Joby Becker

I commend you James,

if you like to put that much effort and that much training time into it, then good for you.

I dont think it is fair to say that people that use tools dont know how to train a dog.

I also think there are some dogs that are gonna need these tools if you want to accomplish anything substantial with them during their lifetime. Dogs come in a variety of types and character.

I know how to hand plane wood, can cut down trees with an axe, and can disassemble and entire car, rebuild it and put it back together without any type of power or air tools. could use a hand drill to ream out broken bolts too 

If I had some inner desire to do that, to be "closer" to the work, or to satisfy some sort of pride factor I could.

That being said, just last week I was using a backhoe to slam trees to the ground after making a small cut with the chainsaw, I also used a belt sander on some lumber, and when I had to change out my original bearing hubs, and front axle Ujoints that were frozen solid on my 1996 jeep, I used air tools and a hydrualic press...I could did it with a socket set and a breaker bar and got the ujoints in and out with 2 bricks and a hammer, but I chose not too...


----------



## Nicole Stark

I think they call dem der fellas craftsmen. Get 'er done! 

Joby, I like your analogies. Gets at the parts I left unsaid to some extent, there's more to it on my end but none of it needs to be said here. It doesn't matter anyway.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Brian McQuain said:


> Unless the training or work is subpar and produces little to nothing, and the prideful one isnt willing to improve upon the work, because in his/her mind, nothing needs improving.


Right...prideful is a good way to put it. Unwillingness to try something new.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Nicole Stark said_: I don't necessarily disagree though I'd never be so bold and refer to the tools others use as crutches._

I second that. 

For me crutches are something I had to lean on when I broke my leg.

The negative use of the word "crutch" as a training tool is often used by those who have or had dogs that have been fairly compliant with their handler's "wishes".

However, not all dogs are so, and some have needed something more than just the well thought out training and praise.


----------



## jim stevens

I'll be honest, I'm not any kind of a great dog trainer, pretty green. I also work sixty hours a week, but still try to work her some every evening. I don't use an ecollar till the dogs are older, as I like to make sure they know the commands before they are corrected. My example is that I messed with her about two months trying to get her to heel off leash, wasn't even close, put on the ecollar (set very low) and in five minutes she would heel off leash. To me this proved that she knew what she was supposed to do all along, but I had no way to 'make' her do it. I also had pretty much the same result with a problem getting her to 'out'. I tried waiting her out, rewarding with bites, toys, etc. finally using a bite builder tug in one hand, gave her a correction with the pinch collar, by the second night, she would immediate 'out'. 

My admittedly limited experience with this one and others makes me believe that it could be done without pinch collars and ecollars, but take WAY more time, likely more time than I have. Unlike some others, I make no claim to being a great trainer, I have not intention of doing PSA, SHH, IPO, Rings, don't even have anyplace in the area to do it. I just want some basic obedience, with some nice bitework, and a dog who is pleasant to be around at home. Mine is 10 mo. old, and progressing nicely, IMO. Maybe I could do it without tools, but the dog's lifespan might be over before I got it done!


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Interesting about pride, some tools/methods rob the handler of the full glory they shoulda got,

That performance was spectacular and inspirational...i wanna be like you dude.......oh you used _, you had yr dog on a _, you wasted how many dogs on yr way......never mind dude, i dont wanna be like you no more if thats what it takes.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Brett said, "I have to say I somewhat agree with James. I fixed a lot of stuff OB wise with no collars, no leashes. Just me, the dog, and a toy in the front yard."

What do you consider a toy? tool, crutch , or just a reward. Anything we use to get a result can be considered any of these. Does it really make a difference as long as we are fair with the dog and we get the results we are looking for?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

As the subject is Tools vs Crutches, I'd say a toy or reward is neither of these.

These are considered a bonus for work well done with tools or crutches.


----------



## Jake Brandyberry

Sportwise this is only possible in IPO. That is what you train James so go ahead and give it a go. More power to you. NOT POSSIBLE to do for any other bite sport.


----------



## Louise Jollyman

A great trainer is a great trainer no matter what tools they do or don't use. 

Tools get a bad name because they are used as a last resort, and often times don't work because the trainer/training has a flaw that got them to that place of last resort, whether it be timing, lack of understanding....etc etc

It does annoy me when newbies see a top competitor use a particular tool, and suddenly they need to get that tool and believe it will magically work!


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Another observation I'd like to throw out there in hopes that someone will prove otherwise ...

In any environment, under any level of distraction, I haven't seen a dog trained with completely motivational methods that could perform better than dogs I have seen trained with a combination of reward and correction. I'm not saying it's impossible (which is why I say I hope someone will prove otherwise). It just seems like in a controlled setting where the handler or reward has greater value, the dogs trained without corrections/aversives perform beautifully, but under distraction when other, more tempting motivations exist, that training seems to fall apart. 

If anyone has links to videos or websites that show otherwise, I would be very interested to see it. Maybe because it takes longer and requires more patience, there haven't been many dogs trained to high levels without corrections. I am intrigued by the idea of taking a puppy and using only motivational methods, but considering it took 3-4 years of intensive training to reach the highest level in PSA with my dog, I'm not sure if it would be practical. Perhaps another venue might be more conducive to these methods.


----------



## Nicole Stark

I'm with you on that perspective. 

Although there is one example that comes to mind but it's a mere snapshot of something fairly confined, which is that motivational retrieve video. It has been posted here a few times previously. I believe her name is Ava and the video was orignally made in Germany. I've yet to see anything touch it but understand that my experience with working dogs amounts to basically nothing when compared to many of our members on the WDF. That, and probably more importantly, I've never see that dog trial so I haven't any idea how it came together in the end. It was just something that came to mind when I read your post.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Nicole, I also think that video is an amazing example of how motivation can be used to produce an impressive result. I would have liked to see the finished product or how the dog performed under distraction. And I am certainly not advocating using primarily aversive methods to train things. I think you can have a beautiful, correct, driven, focused end result by training motivationally and then proofing with corrections. I would just be interested to know if anyone has had that kind of success without corrections.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I've never seen a dog just motivationally trained, without any corrections, achieve satisfactory results.

In German "Zuckerbrot und Peitsche".

I remember our trainer telling me years ago when my dog didn't retrieve the dumbell I had thrown out but another one, much larger, lying further away and I laughed and excused him, "I'll never be too tired to train you Gill but when you throw out a dumbell, your dog has to see it like looking through a tunnel, throw, command and bring, anything less is useless."

*We *learned the hard way but the dogs never suffered. They learned to carry out the command given or else there would be a correction. Nothing brutal about it, just a clear understanding between handler and dog - the handler commands and the dog obeys.

Obviously there is a learning phase but once the dog has learned an exercise thoroughly, there is no reason why it should not carry it out correctly assuming it is in good health and the exercise is not beyond its powers.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Ariel are you referring to bite sports only, plenty of top agility, herding performances done without the owners ever using prongs, ecollar, choking dogs....other performance venues as well, bet money on it. if you consider witholding reward correction then you are right but i dont think james means that. 

Dont be a snob now and say thats not real training cos its not bite sports.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Peter Cavallaro said:


> Ariel are you referring to bite sports only, plenty of top agility, herding performances done without the owners ever using prongs, ecollar, choking dogs....other performance venues as well, bet money on it. if you consider witholding reward correction then you are right but i dont think james means that.
> 
> Dont be a snob now and say thats not real training cos its not bite sports.


I was mostly referring to bite sports, not because I was being snobbish, but because that is where most of my experience falls. Also, in agility and obedience, there typically aren't high level distractions and dogs (at least mine) seem to find running the agility equipment rewarding in itself. I am not very familiar with herding, so I can't really have an educated opinion, but if the dog is highly driven to chase the stock, how would the handler gain control without using tools or aversives? 

Regarding bite sports, the sport I compete in requires the dog to be obedient around agitating decoys and to perform retrieves, changes of position, call offs, etc. under heavy distraction. Certainly some of those exercises can be done without corrections, but, in my experience, there are times that the dogs just decide to blow off their handler and focus on the decoys. There are some dogs that can be motivated by food reward or toys with decoys present, but there are many others who could care less about anything but the decoy. In those cases, it's possible to use the decoy as a reward, but I still feel like the dog understanding there is a consequence (more than just withholding reward) for their disobedience is important for high level performances.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Thanx, makes perfect sense, comes back to the extent of the compulsion and how it is used to reinforce the training ie is it a reinforcer or a substitute for good training....tool or crutch i guess lol. answer depends totally on trainer no doubt.


----------



## Geoff Empey

Jerry Lyda said:


> What do you consider a toy? tool, crutch , or just a reward. Anything we use to get a result can be considered any of these. Does it really make a difference as long as we are fair with the dog and we get the results we are looking for?


Exactly, I really think that anything overused can be a crutch. So like anything overused it becomes something we depend on, so rewards can be a crutch as well. Take them away and we fall. :-({|= 

So really any tool corrective or motivational can be a crutch. But really the dog dictates what it needs as well. It takes a bit of a leap of faith to do just that though. Many of us over collar, over correct and even over reward. We get stuck in seeing thousands of little pictures. Always making things complicated, instead of just the big picture and keeping it simple. 

My young dog has never seen an e-collar though he wears a dummy collar quite regularily and all of his foundation was done with a flat collar, ball and a clicker. Only as he got older have we changed the collar and now during training he wears a fine choke or fursavor. I'm not saying he is some sort of clicker trained black arts ninja warrior. He has issues like any dog where we always struggle, that is what makes it fun though. He recently has been introduced to a prong for one exercise but now that he has had a few eureka moments it is again put back into the tool box. Would I bring it out again? Would I use a e-collar to train and proof some things? ... Maybe. All depends on what the dog dictates what he needs. Never say never. 

In my chosen sport it is really hard to train with obvious correction and even obvious reward as time goes on after the dog has learned the exercise. Things during the exercise in trial are so 'square' it is a sure fire way to have a dog trial wise in a heart beat. So for me personally trying to get my head around that game has been a real challenge and a lot of fun.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

On the distraction argument, Geoff you have claimed that u prep yr dogs for whatever they will see in a trial x10, so if they seen a guy on a manicured trial field wearing a scarey mask waving streamers around a bazzillion times in training how is that anymore a distraction than a greyhound puppy raised on a cat farm???


----------



## Geoff Empey

Peter Cavallaro said:


> On the distraction argument, Geoff you have claimed that u prep yr dogs for whatever they will see in a trial x10, so if they seen a guy on a manicured trial field wearing a scarey mask waving streamers around a bazzillion times in training how is that anymore a distraction than a greyhound puppy raised on a cat farm???


That's an old thread not even related to this one. What's the argument? You get no argument from me with your question. Anything can be presented in training like in trial to trigger a trained response. Though one of these days a few kittens may die. Sorta like what happens every time a Nickleback Song plays on the radio, a baby Llama dies. It's just part of being a greyhound on a cat farm!


----------



## James Downey

Jake Brandyberry said:


> Sportwise this is only possible in IPO. That is what you train James so go ahead and give it a go. More power to you. NOT POSSIBLE to do for any other bite sport.


Ahh. Jake, you'll be pleased to know thier are some Belgian ring trainers having success with this type of training.


----------



## James Downey

And I could not find it, but someone actually believed the population of learners they are working with are somehow elite, and incapable of certain aspects of learning. There was even a dig, that maybe I was working with a less than dog. 

Okay? sweet!


----------



## mike finn

James Downey said:


> Ahh. Jake, you'll be pleased to know thier are some Belgian ring trainers having success with this type of training.


Is their sucess faster or better than with traditional methods? Are you geting faster or better results? Is the finnished product better? Or are you training like this for ethical reasons or as a perosnal challenge, or maybe to enhance your skills and break new ground? I am truly interested and would like to know. I am sure you are much more upto date on the latest training methods than I am. I have to be honest, I am hesitant to change the way I have trained in the past because it worked for me and what I wanted to do. You would call this training old fashioned yank and crank. But I am truly open to suggestion. But I am really most interested in the finished product


----------



## Jake Brandyberry

Not at the top level. You can train a ring dog maybe ring II with no compulsion. I have also met those Belgian guys who are motivational. They have yet to been able to show me or even explain to me how they would train the OG with out it. As I said, NOT POSSIBLE.


----------



## James Downey

Ariel Peldunas said:


> I am also interested in your observations and results, James. As this is a discussion board, I would assume you posted what you did to encourage discussion.
> 
> I use whatever methods or tools I feel are appropriate for the dog I am working with and the task I am training for. Some dogs are naturally compliant and handler oriented and accept that you control how and when they receive reinforcement. Other dogs, by nature, are more independent and determined and thus, more inclinced to be stubborn, resistant or distracted.
> 
> You said you trained completely without a leash or collar ...meaning no tethers used to restrain the dog whatsoever? I am curious if you trained protection work in this manner and what methods you used to limit access to the decoy. Also curious about how you would rate your dog's drive for food, toys, decoy, etc. and how your dog's drive to use his/her nose was naturally before you reinforced the behavior. Also, did you use aversives of any sort ...even so much as body language or verbal corrections (not just a "no, you're wrong marker" but something that the dog actually interpreted as aversive)? Finally, how would you compare this dog's performance to other dogs you have trained using "tools" or other dogs you have seen trained with "tools."
> 
> I am honestly interested as I really do prefer to let me dogs learn and understand what behaviors produce reinforcement instead of teaching them everything and controlling their behavior with leashes and collars. On the other hand, I do think tools are useful in manipulation the environment or limiting the dog's behavior in certain situation. I had much success with my older female malinois luring and rewarding behavior, using prong collars and e-collars and controlling her access to rewards. However, I wish I had allowed her to spend more time experimenting and offering behaviors rather than teaching her what I wanted. She has always been very willing to do whatever I ask, but very unwilling to try to figure out anything on her own when I'm in the picture. When I am not right there to help or guide, however, she is incredibly intelligent and great at problem solving. I did not make the same "mistakes" with my other dogs and saw results I was much happier with. I have incorporated as much operant conditioning into her training as I can and wait for her to figure things out whenever possible, but admittedly, I sometimes lack the time or patience to try to "retrain" a 7 year old dog. It is also frustrating and difficult to find a decoy willing to be patient and allow you to wait for your dog to offer the behavior you are looking for. What has your experience been with finding decoys or training directors who will accommodate your methods?


Okay, I will bite....because I believe Aerial is pure in her motives. I

I retrained one dog, and started one more doing this. 

So first dog, had a lot of training to fall back on....she was so to speak "tainted" and thus not a controlled subject. But I will tell you. I fixed a lot of problems. One was her drive seemed to had been slowly chipped away over 5 years. I have the belief that even in the strongest of dogs correction, no matter how fair or appropriate either makes the dog flat...or makes them a little more hectic. No dog is immune. Some it's just hard to see. But when I started this. I saw my dog come back to life....and I also got the behaviors I had been trying to get....one of them was running blinds. She had a problem of never running all six, if she thought the decoy was in six, thats where she went....we tried everything. Till we put the decoy out in the middle field and had him call her and make attractions. We were out on the field for a long time... before she finally tried something different and ran all six. I also saw that when we started training more behaviors like this....she started catching on faster and faster. So you can use her as I dog I trained with tools. The one thing I thought with this dog compared to the second who has been trained solely with resource management. She was much more prone to distractions. The training fell apart much faster. The second dog knows that it's futile to act on his impulses. and I assure you he was no easy customer. He was a demanding, obnoxious puppy, who was even willing to bite me out of fustration. Now, he is not. he shows submission, and I never once had to kick his ass to get it. I like this cause I believe that he has learned through cooperative interaction it's just simply in his best interests to listen to me. He is submissive by choice, not by force. He willingly and for the greater good takes the omega role. It's much more pure. It's a by-product of the training, not the reason for the training. This also has taught me that dominace and submission are the result in how we interact with our dogs, not some genetic trait to base a training protocol around. I believe if you have a dominate dog, that's the relationship that was created. when we get our dogs, thier is no relationship...it's a blank piece of paper, what we draw on it, is what we draw on it. 

So to the second dog. Drive for food Average, drive for toy High, drive for decoy the same as toy. Dog does not simply care about having the toy, dog wants to fight with it. Just getting it is not rewarding to him. engagment is. 

I never tested his ability use his nose I guess. I just started teaching. I started by making scent circles and just placing the pup on the circle. At first he would eat and then run around looking for more food, he would find it, and then do the same....a few circles in he learned that following the track would help him. but he would track only 1/2 to 3/4 of the circle. The wind blowing away from him would make him turn around. I would put 5-7 pieces of small, small food in each step. He of course would miss some, but sooner or later he at all of it. Then one day he tried something. He explored the unknown and went with the wind and he found more food. This started his first time around the whole circle... This is when I knew he got it. I did some more tracks like this to reassure he was correct and that his hunch was right. This was a golden experiment for me. I got the circle Idea from John Soares, He did use a leash and managed the dogs freedom to explore. I got the exploration idea from Karen pryor. Seeing that I wanted a dog who could make decisions and could figure out problems. Karen Pryor in her book "reaching the animal mind" talks a lot about exploration, and how it's key to problem solving. she also talks about the people who claim this type of training will not work for thier "high drive" "stubborn" dogs. she claims the exploration is a drive in every animal. And that saying thier dog will not try something new, is saying the dog is incapable of exploration which is just untrue. 

But back to tracking, I also did not help much, I aged tracks at least an hour. I did not stomp them in, just normal steps. Trial like. I Watched a dog find a joint in a semi trailer. Then though to myself, in IPO we do not trust the dogs nose enough. We don't need to help them. they can smell even a little bit of crushed grass.

his food drive is way less than the females and he tracks ten times better. It seems I cannot lay a track that he will lose. I think making him him a problem solver right off the get go helped....also the small food with mutliple pieces in each step has taught him to search for it. It's hard for him to actually pinpoint the food, where the older dog it was one piece in every step. dog eats one piece, they know that step is done. Not the second dog, he searches every step as if it were it's own scent pad. I think I created a dog that solves problems and has more searching behaviors. the first dog, I never created any searcing behaviors. I think this is the key to good IPO tracking, teaching the dog to search the broken grass for food, not simply find the broken grass. 


As for decoys.... Generally, it's tough finding a decoy in general. But the group of folks I train with, are willing. and if a decoy is not willing to listen to the handler....he or she is useless to me, no matter what type of training. So, it's been a tough go all around with decoys. but I started this endeavor with a decoy who taught me this style of training.

I have used NRM....I am a little torn on these. Because I do see some negativity with these. I see sometimes when I say no. The dog may get fustrated and bite. It does cause something in the dog. Like if you were on game show and buzzer went off for every wrong answer...I am sure you would feel some defeat there. Not that I am worried about if the dog experiences negative feelings. I am not a touchy feely guy. I am really just concerend with creating behavior. And am trying to see if it's my benefit to use NRM. I have used punishement especially in parenting the dog to teach the boundries. But not for sport. out of drive punishment seems to be loads more effective. In drive, it seems the dog is willing to take a lot more risks. Besides, I believe a dog with high drive, nothing is more punishing the denying access. 

As for distractions, and competeing motivation....both are 10 times more reliable than when I using collars. That's a tricky endeavor because I no longer avoid distractions....I create them. I do not allow the dog access to anything till they listen.

In essence, I have had to be much more of a hard ass with this training than I did with collars. With collars it was.. perform or else...but you still have a chance for a reward if you comply. Now it's comply, or never getting anything. Because frankly I do not care if the dog gets his ball...all I care about is creating behavior. A lot of trainers seem to have a hard time not giving thier dog a reward. They want the dog to leave on a positive note.... I don't care. If the dog leaves the field without ever getting a reward...good, I hope he remembers that experience. That was shitty wasn't it bud. What I like about this training is that it puts a lot responsability on the dog to make the right choice. They have to make the choice of thier own free will, with little coecion. I guess you could say that correction gives them a choice, even though not a pleasent one. it does. But really it's forcing them to do it also in away. 


Here is one stumbling block I have found. The dog will learn that he can take a chance on the first rep. and maybe all that will happen is that he will miss his chance for a reward, and you will make him do it again. Any dog worth his charcter is going to take that chance of possibly not getting a reward and having to do it again. So the day comes when I take them out on the field, tell them what they need to do to get the reward and if they try it thier way. Training is over. the lose the chance at all rewards. Now a dog with high drive for reward....that will leave a lasting impression in thier mind. I have not had to do it again with that behavior. Where as corrections, I seem to always have to go back to it. they last for awhile but then one day the dog risks it.


----------



## James Downey

Jake Brandyberry said:


> Not at the top level. You can train a ring dog maybe ring II with no compulsion. I have also met those Belgian guys who are motivational. They have yet to been able to show me or even explain to me how they would train the OG with out it. As I said, NOT POSSIBLE.


Just a question. Did you just pull that conclusion out of your ass, or have you actually employed the scientific method. 

I only ask, because generally closed minded answers like this seem to only come from people that have something they feel is threatened by new and innovating ideas. Galieo was almost put to death for his theories on astronomy. The Wright brothers were laughed at over a century ago. I am sure if it has not already been done, it surely is possible. Just no one has figured out the puzzle. 

By saying it's not possible is just saying that dogs are helpless to thier own impulses. which I already know is not the truth.


----------



## Bob Scott

James Downey said:


> Okay so the people that use tables, e-collars, pinch collars. I have trained my 18 mos. old dog without a leash or a collar. even in tracking. Just because 2years ago I removed all correction collars. So I figure most trainers "add tools" when they cannot figure a problem out. So, I removed the tools.
> 
> 
> 
> Just as the people who use them claim that they are tools and can be abused. That not having an understanding of thier application is what makes them a problem.
> 
> I can go one step further, and say that people who rely on the use of Tools may very well understand how to use them. and they may, but what my experience has taught me. is most people are introducing tools because they suck at controlling the dogs access to resources.



+1 for James! As to which is faster?! All I can say is it depends on the trainer and the dog. I know, easy out but Look at any training club. Not everyone will train the same thing in the same amount of time using the same method. maybe not everyone's timing is as accurate as it should be. Maybe not everyone's leadership skills are the same. *"Everyone" *will do things just a bit different from the next guy.
I trained with on lead correction for years. I've only trained with off lead motivational for the past 8-9 yrs. Once I got the feel for it I can say that *"I believe*" off lead motivational training creates a stronger desire in the dog to perform. Why would a dog work to avoid corrections if it can gain what it wants from complying?! Strong dog? Give the dog what it wants for what you want from it. Don't pick a fight with a dog that loves to fight. Agreed! Not always possible but *"I believe" *it can be minimized.
*"I believe"* that the recall of doing a behavior is stronger with motivational. 
I doubt I'll toss my tool box but I'll never go back to most of what I did in the past yrs. 
Superior training? Not at all! It's a choice! Everyone trains with a bit of this and a bit of that learned from a lot of different people. You take what you learn and adjust it to fit you and a particular dog. I've trained with many different people over the years and have taken a bit from many of them.
This isn't everyone's choice for many different reasons but it's mine.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Boy have you said volumes. I'm experiencing a lot of the same of what you describe with my herding dogs. One of the reasons I don't like body or tool pressure or corrections is what you describe as hectic. My puppy is calm with the marker work but goes to hectic and fight with the handler with handler pressure. My puppy's breeder and I are essentially training the entire litter. She has 3 of the males and I have one. Rhemy's [mine] brother Ryan is fine with the marker training until he smells livestock. Then its bark at the handler and jump on her pushing on her to do what he wants. They have a 5 year old half sister Merry that is similar. We have experimented with denying access. No work for the handler, no work but I didn't think that was getting us anywhere. A week ago with the 5 year old bitch, I told Cindy to go to NILIF. The difference in a week was amazing. She said the light bulb went off when they had to work for their meals. The male puppy Ryan though is still an issue. So he is on a stricter program--no frollicking with dogs. Everything must come through Cindy and he must work for it. I find punishment in drive with these guys only gets you frantic hectic and over pressuring the stock. 

Whether or not the dog will work for reward around something intensely distracting is a pack issue, not anything necessarily related to how high/intense the drive. I'm becoming convinced of that. I haven't been nearly strict enough with my bouv. The worst thing I've done with her wig out prey moments is to continue working her. The second I get her stopped, it should be leash out and game over. Correcting and continuing is worthless because they have further opportunity for reward and drive engagement/satisfaction. This is a PITA when you have driven an hour or so to work the dog on something specific. However, I've seen it be more profound to end the work and get another dog than a dozen corrections. 

I've worked with exploration with my herding dogs. At times I just say leave them alone and let them figure it out. People think the dog comes to the work or training with malice in their hearts or self reward only. Not true. With my new client dog, I think NO as a NRM just leads to barking at me and taking a dive for the stock. Leashing her up for okay game over will be much better. I deal with a lot of high drive independent thinkers who'll take a correction and keep on ticking. They are very capable of saying screw you and your correction, I'm going to do what I want and suffer the consequences. For my bouv, I have to take this to the extreme--no second chances. 

With the reward system I've been doing since he was 12 weeks old, my puppy will get around stock and start to amp up [race around the duck pen with the high pitched bark] and suddenly without a word from me, down himself and look at me. He's making the choice to cap and control himself. If I go in there with the compulsion and pressure, I get fight and hectic. Sure the marker work will take longer and calls for me to be more creative, especially with his cast work but the alternative is not going to get me reliability. 

Terrasita





James Downey said:


> Okay, I will bite....because I believe Aerial is pure in her motives. I
> 
> I retrained one dog, and started one more doing this.
> 
> So first dog, had a lot of training to fall back on....she was so to speak "tainted" and thus not a controlled subject. But I will tell you. I fixed a lot of problems. One was her drive seemed to had been slowly chipped away over 5 years. I have the belief that even in the strongest of dogs correction, no matter how fair or appropriate either makes the dog flat...or makes them a little more hectic. No dog is immune. Some it's just hard to see. But when I started this. I saw my dog come back to life....and I also got the behaviors I had been trying to get....one of them was running blinds. She had a problem of never running all six, if she thought the decoy was in six, thats where she went....we tried everything. Till we put the decoy out in the middle field and had him call her and make attractions. We were out on the field for a long time... before she finally tried something different and ran all six. I also saw that when we started training more behaviors like this....she started catching on faster and faster. So you can use her as I dog I trained with tools. The one thing I thought with this dog compared to the second who has been trained solely with resource management. She was much more prone to distractions. The training fell apart much faster. The second dog knows that it's futile to act on his impulses. and I assure you he was no easy customer. He was a demanding, obnoxious puppy, who was even willing to bite me out of fustration. Now, he is not. he shows submission, and I never once had to kick his ass to get it. I like this cause I believe that he has learned through cooperative interaction it's just simply in his best interests to listen to me. He is submissive by choice, not by force. He willingly and for the greater good takes the omega role. It's much more pure. It's a by-product of the training, not the reason for the training. This also has taught me that dominace and submission are the result in how we interact with our dogs, not some genetic trait to base a training protocol around. I believe if you have a dominate dog, that's the relationship that was created. when we get our dogs, thier is no relationship...it's a blank piece of paper, what we draw on it, is what we draw on it.
> 
> So to the second dog. Drive for food Average, drive for toy High, drive for decoy the same as toy. Dog does not simply care about having the toy, dog wants to fight with it. Just getting it is not rewarding to him. engagment is.
> 
> I never tested his ability use his nose I guess. I just started teaching. I started by making scent circles and just placing the pup on the circle. At first he would eat and then run around looking for more food, he would find it, and then do the same....a few circles in he learned that following the track would help him. but he would track only 1/2 to 3/4 of the circle. The wind blowing away from him would make him turn around. I would put 5-7 pieces of small, small food in each step. He of course would miss some, but sooner or later he at all of it. Then one day he tried something. He explored the unknown and went with the wind and he found more food. This started his first time around the whole circle... This is when I knew he got it. I did some more tracks like this to reassure he was correct and that his hunch was right. This was a golden experiment for me. I got the circle Idea from John Soares, He did use a leash and managed the dogs freedom to explore. I got the exploration idea from Karen pryor. Seeing that I wanted a dog who could make decisions and could figure out problems. Karen Pryor in her book "reaching the animal mind" talks a lot about exploration, and how it's key to problem solving. she also talks about the people who claim this type of training will not work for thier "high drive" "stubborn" dogs. she claims the exploration is a drive in every animal. And that saying thier dog will not try something new, is saying the dog is incapable of exploration which is just untrue.
> 
> But back to tracking, I also did not help much, I aged tracks at least an hour. I did not stomp them in, just normal steps. Trial like. I Watched a dog find a joint in a semi trailer. Then though to myself, in IPO we do not trust the dogs nose enough. We don't need to help them. they can smell even a little bit of crushed grass.
> 
> his food drive is way less than the females and he tracks ten times better. It seems I cannot lay a track that he will lose. I think making him him a problem solver right off the get go helped....also the small food with mutliple pieces in each step has taught him to search for it. It's hard for him to actually pinpoint the food, where the older dog it was one piece in every step. dog eats one piece, they know that step is done. Not the second dog, he searches every step as if it were it's own scent pad. I think I created a dog that solves problems and has more searching behaviors. the first dog, I never created any searcing behaviors. I think this is the key to good IPO tracking, teaching the dog to search the broken grass for food, not simply find the broken grass.
> 
> 
> As for decoys.... Generally, it's tough finding a decoy in general. But the group of folks I train with, are willing. and if a decoy is not willing to listen to the handler....he or she is useless to me, no matter what type of training. So, it's been a tough go all around with decoys. but I started this endeavor with a decoy who taught me this style of training.
> 
> I have used NRM....I am a little torn on these. Because I do see some negativity with these. I see sometimes when I say no. The dog may get fustrated and bite. It does cause something in the dog. Like if you were on game show and buzzer went off for every wrong answer...I am sure you would feel some defeat there. Not that I am worried about if the dog experiences negative feelings. I am not a touchy feely guy. I am really just concerend with creating behavior. And am trying to see if it's my benefit to use NRM. I have used punishement especially in parenting the dog to teach the boundries. But not for sport. out of drive punishment seems to be loads more effective. In drive, it seems the dog is willing to take a lot more risks. Besides, I believe a dog with high drive, nothing is more punishing the denying access.
> 
> As for distractions, and competeing motivation....both are 10 times more reliable than when I using collars. That's a tricky endeavor because I no longer avoid distractions....I create them. I do not allow the dog access to anything till they listen.
> 
> In essence, I have had to be much more of a hard ass with this training than I did with collars. With collars it was.. perform or else...but you still have a chance for a reward if you comply. Now it's comply, or never getting anything. Because frankly I do not care if the dog gets his ball...all I care about is creating behavior. A lot of trainers seem to have a hard time not giving thier dog a reward. They want the dog to leave on a positive note.... I don't care. If the dog leaves the field without ever getting a reward...good, I hope he remembers that experience. That was shitty wasn't it bud. What I like about this training is that it puts a lot responsability on the dog to make the right choice. They have to make the choice of thier own free will, with little coecion. I guess you could say that correction gives them a choice, even though not a pleasent one. it does. But really it's forcing them to do it also in away.
> 
> 
> Here is one stumbling block I have found. The dog will learn that he can take a chance on the first rep. and maybe all that will happen is that he will miss his chance for a reward, and you will make him do it again. Any dog worth his charcter is going to take that chance of possibly not getting a reward and having to do it again. So the day comes when I take them out on the field, tell them what they need to do to get the reward and if they try it thier way. Training is over. the lose the chance at all rewards. Now a dog with high drive for reward....that will leave a lasting impression in thier mind. I have not had to do it again with that behavior. Where as corrections, I seem to always have to go back to it. they last for awhile but then one day the dog risks it.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Peter Cavallaro said:


> Ariel are you referring to bite sports only, plenty of top agility, herding performances done without the owners ever using prongs, ecollar, choking dogs....other performance venues as well, bet money on it.


How do you know Peter? You have never trained or even been around a top dog in any venue.


Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Joby Becker

James Downey said:


> Okay so the people that use tables, e-collars, pinch collars. I have trained my 18 mos. old dog without a leash or a collar. even in tracking. Just because 2years ago I removed all correction collars. So I figure most trainers "add tools" when they cannot figure a problem out. So, I removed the tools.
> 
> Just as the people who use them claim that they are tools and can be abused. That not having an understanding of thier application is what makes them a problem.
> 
> I can go one step further, and say that people who rely on the use of Tools may very well understand how to use them. and they may, but what my experience has taught me. is most people are introducing tools because they suck at controlling the dogs access to resources.


I would also add that in my experience, you "figure" wrong...

I have never trained with anyone that does not use a leash or collars of some sort. Closest I came was with a girl that did all her foundation OB without any leashes or collars. 

In my experience, your assumptions don't fit, because myself and everyone I know personally, uses the tools from the start, we do not try to do without them, and then 'have' to use them because of some kind of stumbling block we come to. We just use them. There is nothing wrong with using tools to do things. People use them because they like to, and they work for them. 

I imagine it would be difficult to find decoys that are willing to do things with that type of training. I can only assume it will take a lot more time for certain things, with a lot more repetitions, not sure on that but just guessing, since I have never tried it. The people I train with, we use bitesuits about 80% of the time, which I think would make your methods considerably more difficult, because you cannot withhold the reward, or at least I cannot think of how you could. Unless you are thinking just dont interact with the dog at all, when he bites. Then I can see it, but still seems like it would take many many many more repetitions. And it is very hard to not "interact" with the dog when it is munching you in the suit, you naturally move some, it is impossible to just stand there, and even with a very thick suit, like a BR suit, the dog can make his own fight.

I was just talking about this thread with a friend of mine that does not use toy rewards for anything, uses a little food with his pups while teaching OB. Granted he does not do sport, but has a dog that doubles as an assistance dog and a PP dog. He takes his dog everywhere he goes, and I mean EVERYWHERE, and his dog will also bite anyone on command, man or woman, if need be. I have seen him command the dog to bite pretty much anything, trees, fence posts, all manners of things. Dog likes to bite stuff. He is of the opinion that food and toy rewards are "crutches" for the most part as well. I am not of that opinion personally, but could not really argue with his point of view, in a logical manner. His dog is with him 24/7 and is expected to do what it is told to do, without toys or treats. He does pat the dog and give a "good boy" that is it as far as rewards..

There are about 15 dog training places that train pet dogs in my area that are of the 100% positive method type. There was a good run of 4-5 yrs that I was training a lot of pet dogs for people. Almost all of them have gone through at least one, sometimes 3-4 "classes" locally, and I get called because the dogs are not listening to the owners like they thought they would. I am working with 2 dogs currently that are like this. In all cases the dogs know what they are being told to do, will perform to high degree with food or toys present, but in most cases they will not comply very consistently at all without the presence of a reward of some kind. I realize these are pet dogs and not sport dogs, with less than great trainers, but I have not been sold on the positive only method because of this. Even you yourself state that you use punishment for stuff other than what is expected on the trial field, when the dog is not in drive. Which to me means that those uses of "punishments" DO carry over into the other things you do. 

You made a comment in another thread about "confirming" that the FMBB champion of whatever, trained with these methods that you describe, which was disputed by others here, I did not see a response to that at all from you.

I think it is good you are doing what you are doing, but to imply it is a crutch for someone else I dont agree with, it is just that others might not see a need to do it your way, and do not have an interest in doing it that way.

all that aside...coupla questions...

Are you saying you do not use any leashes or lines in bitework either? Or just the OB?

If so, can you explain a little bit how you go about teaching proper targeting, countering and grip building, or drive building? You never backtied the dog or use any type of leash or collar for backpressure, or to hold the dog back at all?

*How would you go about training exercises where the dog is able to self reward itself, such as call-offs and object guards with decoy in a bite suit, (where the decoy cannot "hide" the reward from the dog) without the use of a leash and collar or some other tool?*


----------



## Christopher Smith

mike finn said:


> Is their sucess faster or better than with traditional methods? Are you geting faster or better results? Is the finnished product better? Or are you training like this for ethical reasons or as a perosnal challenge, or maybe to enhance your skills and break new ground? I am truly interested and would like to know. I am sure you are much more upto date on the latest training methods than I am. I have to be honest, I am hesitant to change the way I have trained in the past because it worked for me and what I wanted to do. You would call this training old fashioned yank and crank. But I am truly open to suggestion. But I am really most interested in the finished product


Mike don't go down the rabbit hole following that bullshit. First ascertain if it's true. I ride my unicorn across a double rainbow to every Belgian ring trial and training training session in the world, using technology borrowed from Santa Clause, and I have never seen this.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> I would also add that in my experience, you "figure" wrong...
> 
> I have never trained with anyone that does not use a leash or collars of some sort. Closest I came was with a girl that did all her foundation OB without any leashes or collars.
> 
> In my experience, your assumptions don't fit, because myself and everyone I know personally, uses the tools from the start, we do not try to do without them, and then 'have' to use them because of some kind of stumbling block we come to. We just use them. There is nothing wrong with using tools to do things. People use them because they like to, and they work for them.
> 
> I imagine it would be difficult to find decoys that are willing to do things with that type of training. I can only assume it will take a lot more time for certain things, with a lot more repetitions, not sure on that but just guessing, since I have never tried it. The people I train with, we use bitesuits about 80% of the time, which I think would make your methods considerably more difficult, because you cannot withhold the reward, or at least I cannot think of how you could. Unless you are thinking just dont interact with the dog at all, when he bites. Then I can see it, but still seems like it would take many many many more repetitions. And it is very hard to not "interact" with the dog when it is munching you in the suit, you naturally move some, it is impossible to just stand there, and even with a very thick suit, like a BR suit, the dog can make his own fight.
> 
> I was just talking about this thread with a friend of mine that does not use toy rewards for anything, uses a little food with his pups while teaching OB. Granted he does not do sport, but has a dog that doubles as an assistance dog and a PP dog. He takes his dog everywhere he goes, and I mean EVERYWHERE, and his dog will also bite anyone on command, man or woman, if need be. I have seen him command the dog to bite pretty much anything, trees, fence posts, all manners of things. Dog likes to bite stuff. He is of the opinion that food and toy rewards are "crutches" for the most part as well. I am not of that opinion personally, but could not really argue with his point of view, in a logical manner. His dog is with him 24/7 and is expected to do what it is told to do, without toys or treats. He does pat the dog and give a "good boy" that is it as far as rewards..
> 
> There are about 15 dog training places that train pet dogs in my area that are of the 100% positive method type. There was a good run of 4-5 yrs that I was training a lot of pet dogs for people. Almost all of them have gone through at least one, sometimes 3-4 "classes" locally, and I get called because the dogs are not listening to the owners like they thought they would. I am working with 2 dogs currently that are like this. In all cases the dogs know what they are being told to do, will perform to high degree with food or toys present, but in most cases they will not comply very consistently at all without the presence of a reward of some kind. I realize these are pet dogs and not sport dogs, with less than great trainers, but I have not been sold on the positive only method because of this. Even you yourself state that you use punishment for stuff other than what is expected on the trial field, when the dog is not in drive. Which to me means that those uses of "punishments" DO carry over into the other things you do.
> 
> You made a comment in another thread about "confirming" that the FMBB champion of whatever, trained with these methods that you describe, which was disputed by others here, I did not see a response to that at all from you.
> 
> I think it is good you are doing what you are doing, but to imply it is a crutch for someone else I dont agree with, it is just that others might not see a need to do it your way, and do not have an interest in doing it that way.
> 
> all that aside...coupla questions...
> 
> Are you saying you do not use any leashes or lines in bitework either? Or just the OB?
> 
> If so, can you explain a little bit how you go about teaching proper targeting, countering and grip building, or drive building? You never backtied the dog or use any type of leash or collar for backpressure, or to hold the dog back at all?
> 
> *How would you go about training exercises where the dog is able to self reward itself, such as call-offs and object guards with decoy in a bite suit, (where the decoy cannot "hide" the reward from the dog) without the use of a leash and collar or some other tool?*


 
Please don't use pet dog training as an example of how positive only doesn't work. If the dog will only work when he can see or smell food, then they have a training technique issue. I think you are only picking up on the reward aspet of the post. HUGE in his formula is the leadership training of no access to what the dog wants or reward unless he gets compliance. I think with a lot of things the dog is amped up without the handler in the picture and then later come trying to get the controls. Starting this stuff from puppyhood and before amping drive is probably a big part of whether it can be successful. 

Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Please don't use pet dog training as an example of how positive only doesn't work. If the dog will only work when he can see or smell food, then they have a training technique issue. I think you are only picking up on the reward aspet of the post. HUGE in his formula is the leadership training of no access to what the dog wants or reward unless he gets compliance. I think with a lot of things the dog is amped up without the handler in the picture and then later come trying to get the controls. Starting this stuff from puppyhood and before amping drive is probably a big part of whether it can be successful.
> 
> Terrasita


I was just giving my experiences, apparently no one uses these 100% positive methods for EVERYTHING, not even you or Jim, so to expect some pet owner to be able to do it is ridiculous...

Seems like everyone (even the 100% positive) uses some form of punishments or corrections off the field, or out of drive or whatever, which will naturally lend more weight to words on the field... 

How would you train an OG or call-off of decoys in suits, without any collars or leash? Still trying to figure that out. any ideas?


----------



## brad robert

Christopher Smith said:


> Mike don't go down the rabbit hole following that bullshit. First ascertain if it's true. I ride my unicorn across a double rainbow to every Belgian ring trial and training training session in the world, using technology borrowed from Santa Clause, and I have never seen this.
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


LMAO thats funny but oh so true.


----------



## Joby Becker

addition for T. since james will most likely not answer.

How would you go about targeting, teaching counters, and working grip, without collars or leashes, or building drive or using frustration to bring aggression?

Or are those uses exempt from the "crutch" label? if so, a crutch is still a crutch, no matter how you use it....


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

I have an idea for the call off, Joby. Still thinking on the OG. 

I can't take credit for the premise. I saw something similar in a video Randy Hare uses at his seminars. Find a field with a fence that is impenetrable by the dog, but still allows the dog to see the decoy on the other side (tall chain link). If there is a gate that the decoy can escape through, even better. Send the dog on the decoy, have another decoy hiding behind the handler. First decoy escapes through gate, dog is called off. Dog can still see, smell and believes he can get to the first decoy, but there is no way he can. Once dog complies and turns to return to handler, dog is rewarded by second decoy. Hopefully, you've already taught the dog an out, otherwise you only get one repetition.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> I was just giving my experiences, apparently no one uses these 100% positive methods for EVERYTHING, not even you or Jim, so to expect some pet owner to be able to do it is ridiculous...
> 
> Seems like everyone (even the 100% positive) uses some form of punishments or corrections off the field, or out of drive or whatever, which will naturally lend more weight to words on the field...
> 
> How would you train an OG or call-off of decoys in suits, without any collars or leash? Still trying to figure that out. any ideas?


 
I don't think the out of drive corrections have any affect on my dog's amped drive state of mind. With my puppy, whether or not I have a call off depends on how far into drive he gets. With stock moving and he's gone to lala land---no call off. With stock moving and its been a marker training session, I can call him off. Lala land is occuring when I use compulsion type pressure training. Ultimately you want the drive and intensity with the line of communication and compliance to the handler. I think if you have managed to convince the dog of his pack relationship with his handler, you can get it. You have to convince him that its all through you. I have to call a dog off in pursuit of livestock so to speak. Rhemy is doing well in the presence of stock without it moving. Now I have to deal with the movement further triggering him and having the same response to me and calmness. The plan is for me to start with being able to control how much the stock moves and progress from that in terms of speed and distance. I do use long lines with the dog on a harness. If you had control of the bite in the way that James describes initially, I don't know why the OG would require collars and leashes. James is proposing to get in the dog's head at a pretty deep level I think. If the dog is really in pack obedience to the handler, you don't have to punish it to get compliance. If you start off fostering independence and screw the handler and rewarding that, then punishment may be your only way out.

My experiment on this is only 10 months old so we'll see what I think of it by the time he is 3ish.

T


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Also, I had an ex that trained his dog to out using food and a clicker. He started when his dog was a young pup. The dog learned to out and down off of a tug for a treat. I was with him until the dog was probably close to two and I can't remember him ever correcting the dog for the out, even off of a decoy in a suit or on a sleeve. It was pretty impressive how clear the dog was even when he was amped up. I saw him correct the dog for plenty of other things, but never for the out. As soon as the dog heard the command, he was spitting out whatever was in his mouth and dropping into a down. And the dog had plenty of drive to bite. It's not as if the dog wasn't interested in biting in the first place. With this in mind, I wonder if a pup could be imprinted to out and return to the object with the same correctness and intensity. In the case of the ex's dog, it's as if this was such a conditioned response, he couldn't help but comply ...muscle memory, perhaps? Maybe the OG sequence could be taught to a pup using a tug and maybe that sequence would stick when the pup matured? Just a thought ...trying to be open minded.


----------



## Joby Becker

Ariel Peldunas said:


> I have an idea for the call off, Joby. Still thinking on the OG.
> 
> I can't take credit for the premise. I saw something similar in a video Randy Hare uses at his seminars. Find a field with a fence that is impenetrable by the dog, but still allows the dog to see the decoy on the other side (tall chain link). If there is a gate that the decoy can escape through, even better. Send the dog on the decoy, have another decoy hiding behind the handler. First decoy escapes through gate, dog is called off. Dog can still see, smell and believes he can get to the first decoy, but there is no way he can. Once dog complies and turns to return to handler, dog is rewarded by second decoy. Hopefully, you've already taught the dog an out, otherwise you only get one repetition.


Seems like it would work. if you use the fence as a "crutch"  (J/K sort of). Then how do you proof it, once you are ready to try it in various places with the one decoy, and no fence? just say no?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> addition for T. since james will most likely not answer.
> 
> How would you go about targeting, teaching counters, and working grip, without collars or leashes, or building drive or using frustration to bring aggression?
> 
> Or are those uses exempt from the "crutch" label? if so, a crutch is still a crutch, no matter how you use it....


 
Joby, I trained with a club for over a year that taught the grip foundation work without corrections and collars. I think its the "building" and training for aggression for the look of it that gets you into these spaces of then needing to get control. I took James' post as meaning without corrections or pinch and e-collar corrections, not having a dog on a collar and lead.

I've had some thoughts on the OG but until you've trained that exercise and seen how the dogs process information, I don't think you can make exact enough training calls. I deal with the call off mentality and can make the analogy. 

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Also, I had an ex that trained his dog to out using food and a clicker. He started when his dog was a young pup. The dog learned to out and down off of a tug for a treat. I was with him until the dog was probably close to two and I can't remember him ever correcting the dog for the out, even off of a decoy in a suit or on a sleeve. It was pretty impressive how clear the dog was even when he was amped up. I saw him correct the dog for plenty of other things, but never for the out. As soon as the dog heard the command, he was spitting out whatever was in his mouth and dropping into a down. And the dog had plenty of drive to bite. It's not as if the dog wasn't interested in biting in the first place. With this in mind, I wonder if a pup could be imprinted to out and return to the object with the same correctness and intensity. In the case of the ex's dog, it's as if this was such a conditioned response, he couldn't help but comply ...muscle memory, perhaps? Maybe the OG sequence could be taught to a pup using a tug and maybe that sequence would stick when the pup matured? Just a thought ...trying to be open minded.


sounds plausible to attempt if one was so inclined. but how do you stop the dog from coming off of the basket and self rewarding before he is supposed to? another fence ?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Also, I had an ex that trained his dog to out using food and a clicker. He started when his dog was a young pup. The dog learned to out and down off of a tug for a treat. I was with him until the dog was probably close to two and I can't remember him ever correcting the dog for the out, even off of a decoy in a suit or on a sleeve. It was pretty impressive how clear the dog was even when he was amped up. I saw him correct the dog for plenty of other things, but never for the out. As soon as the dog heard the command, he was spitting out whatever was in his mouth and dropping into a down. And the dog had plenty of drive to bite. It's not as if the dog wasn't interested in biting in the first place. With this in mind, I wonder if a pup could be imprinted to out and return to the object with the same correctness and intensity. In the case of the ex's dog, it's as if this was such a conditioned response, he couldn't help but comply ...muscle memory, perhaps? Maybe the OG sequence could be taught to a pup using a tug and maybe that sequence would stick when the pup matured? Just a thought ...trying to be open minded.


 
I had one about to breed a girlie dog off at a distance and yelled "PLATZ" He actually dismounted and hit the dirt looking confused and disoriented. Starting them as puppies I think is the key.

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> sounds plausible to attempt if one was so inclined. but how do you stop the dog from coming off of the basket and self rewarding before he is supposed to? another fence ?


Instinctive guard Seriously Joby, if you are in their head, they don't think about self rewarding. I've left nutso drive dogs lose with sheep in a pen while off to do something else. They don't think of this self reward stuff. 

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Joby, I trained with a club for over a year that taught the grip foundation work without corrections and collars. I think its the "building" and training for aggression for the look of it that gets you into these spaces of then needing to get control. I took James' post as meaning without corrections or pinch and e-collar corrections, not having a dog on a collar and lead.
> 
> I've had some thoughts on the OG but until you've trained that exercise and seen how the dogs process information, I don't think you can make exact enough training calls. I deal with the call off mentality and can make the analogy.
> 
> T


T. I do not think most people build "aggression" for the "look" of it.

Probably right, I just took it to mean NO collars...my mistake...


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Joby! What's with all the intelligent questions at 4 am?! I hadn't thought about how to get past Step 1! Let me ponder and I'll get back to you after some sleep and when I'm not distracted by a fly drawn to the glow of my iPad.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> T. I do not think most people build "aggression" for the "look" of it.
> 
> Probably right, I just took it to mean NO collars...my mistake...


 
Why would you have to "build" aggression for anything. Dog either has or he doesn't. If you are bit you're bit. I know what you mean though. If I get Rhemy into frustration aggression, you mind as well put him up. He's going to bite something and calm effective work has gone out the window. I guess that's where the collars would come in.

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Instinctive guard Seriously Joby, if you are in their head, they don't think about self rewarding. I've left nutso drive dogs lose with sheep in a pen while off to do something else. They don't think of this self reward stuff.
> 
> T


If you are in their head? do the corrections and punishments off of the field and in the house aid in that process?


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Why would you have to "build" aggression for anything. Dog either has or he doesn't. If you are bit you're bit. I know what you mean though. If I get Rhemy into frustration aggression, you mind as well put him up. He's going to bite something and calm effective work has gone out the window. I guess that's where the collars would come in.
> 
> T


I am talking about biting and fighting aggressively while the dog is on the bite as an end goal, which to maximize it, often requires "building" aggression systematically on or off the bite.. you cannot have good fighting behaviors without aggression.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> If you are in their head? do the corrections and punishments off of the field and in the house aid in that process?


I don't believe out of drive corrections aid in getting control in drive. I think the only way that anything works is that it happens while the dog is in that state of mind. Maybe with a more handler sensitive dog it may have some effect in drive but I have the insensitive types.

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> I am talking about biting and fighting aggressively while the dog is on the bite as an end goal, which to maximize it, often requires "building" aggression systematically on or off the bite.. you cannot have good fighting behaviors without aggression.


 
With mine, the fight itself brings the aggression, not some sort of frustration.

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> With mine, the fight itself brings the aggression, not some sort of frustration.
> 
> T


so you do not work on barking while restraining the dog?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> so you do not work on barking while restraining the dog?


 

Joby, my stuff happens in the real. Its not trained scenarios. I watched at a seminar GSD puppies focused on the rag and getting the bite and all they wanted them to do was make noise lunging on the end of the lead. Drove me crazy. You had these calm focused intent dogs and they wanted frantic, hectic lunging. None of that is realistic--to me. The real ones are going to nail you in a blink of an eye and they don't make a sound. As for aggression, when you have teeth puncture wounds, do you really care?

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Joby, my stuff happens in the real. Its not trained scenarios. I watched at a seminar GSD puppies focused on the rag and getting the bite and all they wanted them to do was make noise lunging on the end of the lead. Drove me crazy. You had these calm focused intent dogs and they wanted frantic, hectic lunging. None of that is realistic--to me. The real ones are going to nail you in a blink of an eye and they don't make a sound. As for aggression, when you have teeth puncture wounds, do you really care?
> 
> T


In my experience a dog is not going to bite and put puncture wounds in someone without doing it aggressively...if you are talking a real bite in real life, as opposed to an accident, like a missed tug or something..

I thought you trained SCH, you mentioned a club previously...

How do you train for biting then? not sport, but for real?


----------



## Larry Krohn

James Downey said:


> Okay, I will bite....because I believe Aerial is pure in her motives. I
> 
> I retrained one dog, and started one more doing this.
> 
> So first dog, had a lot of training to fall back on....she was so to speak "tainted" and thus not a controlled subject. But I will tell you. I fixed a lot of problems. One was her drive seemed to had been slowly chipped away over 5 years. I have the belief that even in the strongest of dogs correction, no matter how fair or appropriate either makes the dog flat...or makes them a little more hectic. No dog is immune. Some it's just hard to see. But when I started this. I saw my dog come back to life....and I also got the behaviors I had been trying to get....one of them was running blinds. She had a problem of never running all six, if she thought the decoy was in six, thats where she went....we tried everything. Till we put the decoy out in the middle field and had him call her and make attractions. We were out on the field for a long time... before she finally tried something different and ran all six. I also saw that when we started training more behaviors like this....she started catching on faster and faster. So you can use her as I dog I trained with tools. The one thing I thought with this dog compared to the second who has been trained solely with resource management. She was much more prone to distractions. The training fell apart much faster. The second dog knows that it's futile to act on his impulses. and I assure you he was no easy customer. He was a demanding, obnoxious puppy, who was even willing to bite me out of fustration. Now, he is not. he shows submission, and I never once had to kick his ass to get it. I like this cause I believe that he has learned through cooperative interaction it's just simply in his best interests to listen to me. He is submissive by choice, not by force. He willingly and for the greater good takes the omega role. It's much more pure. It's a by-product of the training, not the reason for the training. This also has taught me that dominace and submission are the result in how we interact with our dogs, not some genetic trait to base a training protocol around. I believe if you have a dominate dog, that's the relationship that was created. when we get our dogs, thier is no relationship...it's a blank piece of paper, what we draw on it, is what we draw on it.
> 
> So to the second dog. Drive for food Average, drive for toy High, drive for decoy the same as toy. Dog does not simply care about having the toy, dog wants to fight with it. Just getting it is not rewarding to him. engagment is.
> 
> I never tested his ability use his nose I guess. I just started teaching. I started by making scent circles and just placing the pup on the circle. At first he would eat and then run around looking for more food, he would find it, and then do the same....a few circles in he learned that following the track would help him. but he would track only 1/2 to 3/4 of the circle. The wind blowing away from him would make him turn around. I would put 5-7 pieces of small, small food in each step. He of course would miss some, but sooner or later he at all of it. Then one day he tried something. He explored the unknown and went with the wind and he found more food. This started his first time around the whole circle... This is when I knew he got it. I did some more tracks like this to reassure he was correct and that his hunch was right. This was a golden experiment for me. I got the circle Idea from John Soares, He did use a leash and managed the dogs freedom to explore. I got the exploration idea from Karen pryor. Seeing that I wanted a dog who could make decisions and could figure out problems. Karen Pryor in her book "reaching the animal mind" talks a lot about exploration, and how it's key to problem solving. she also talks about the people who claim this type of training will not work for thier "high drive" "stubborn" dogs. she claims the exploration is a drive in every animal. And that saying thier dog will not try something new, is saying the dog is incapable of exploration which is just untrue.
> 
> But back to tracking, I also did not help much, I aged tracks at least an hour. I did not stomp them in, just normal steps. Trial like. I Watched a dog find a joint in a semi trailer. Then though to myself, in IPO we do not trust the dogs nose enough. We don't need to help them. they can smell even a little bit of crushed grass.
> 
> his food drive is way less than the females and he tracks ten times better. It seems I cannot lay a track that he will lose. I think making him him a problem solver right off the get go helped....also the small food with mutliple pieces in each step has taught him to search for it. It's hard for him to actually pinpoint the food, where the older dog it was one piece in every step. dog eats one piece, they know that step is done. Not the second dog, he searches every step as if it were it's own scent pad. I think I created a dog that solves problems and has more searching behaviors. the first dog, I never created any searcing behaviors. I think this is the key to good IPO tracking, teaching the dog to search the broken grass for food, not simply find the broken grass.
> 
> 
> As for decoys.... Generally, it's tough finding a decoy in general. But the group of folks I train with, are willing. and if a decoy is not willing to listen to the handler....he or she is useless to me, no matter what type of training. So, it's been a tough go all around with decoys. but I started this endeavor with a decoy who taught me this style of training.
> 
> I have used NRM....I am a little torn on these. Because I do see some negativity with these. I see sometimes when I say no. The dog may get fustrated and bite. It does cause something in the dog. Like if you were on game show and buzzer went off for every wrong answer...I am sure you would feel some defeat there. Not that I am worried about if the dog experiences negative feelings. I am not a touchy feely guy. I am really just concerend with creating behavior. And am trying to see if it's my benefit to use NRM. I have used punishement especially in parenting the dog to teach the boundries. But not for sport. out of drive punishment seems to be loads more effective. In drive, it seems the dog is willing to take a lot more risks. Besides, I believe a dog with high drive, nothing is more punishing the denying access.
> 
> As for distractions, and competeing motivation....both are 10 times more reliable than when I using collars. That's a tricky endeavor because I no longer avoid distractions....I create them. I do not allow the dog access to anything till they listen.
> 
> In essence, I have had to be much more of a hard ass with this training than I did with collars. With collars it was.. perform or else...but you still have a chance for a reward if you comply. Now it's comply, or never getting anything. Because frankly I do not care if the dog gets his ball...all I care about is creating behavior. A lot of trainers seem to have a hard time not giving thier dog a reward. They want the dog to leave on a positive note.... I don't care. If the dog leaves the field without ever getting a reward...good, I hope he remembers that experience. That was shitty wasn't it bud. What I like about this training is that it puts a lot responsability on the dog to make the right choice. They have to make the choice of thier own free will, with little coecion. I guess you could say that correction gives them a choice, even though not a pleasent one. it does. But really it's forcing them to do it also in away.
> 
> 
> Here is one stumbling block I have found. The dog will learn that he can take a chance on the first rep. and maybe all that will happen is that he will miss his chance for a reward, and you will make him do it again. Any dog worth his charcter is going to take that chance of possibly not getting a reward and having to do it again. So the day comes when I take them out on the field, tell them what they need to do to get the reward and if they try it thier way. Training is over. the lose the chance at all rewards. Now a dog with high drive for reward....that will leave a lasting impression in thier mind. I have not had to do it again with that behavior. Where as corrections, I seem to always have to go back to it. they last for awhile but then one day the dog risks it.


Dominance and submission is a result of how we interact with our dogs. That is perfectly said James. Could not be more accurate


----------



## Geoff Empey

James Downey said:


> Ahh. Jake, you'll be pleased to know thier are some Belgian ring trainers having success with this type of training.


Some success for sure but we never see this style of training on top, even in the tiny world that is Belgian Ring. I've had some success training like that too but I've found with the dogs I work with, I had to find a more 'rounded' method. For me that's coming from a more compulsion based mindset to a more operant conditioning mindset. So I do get more into the head of the dog by other ways such as withholding reward. Yes it has totally changed the way I train my dogs. But I really don't think I would ever dismiss 'tools' or the so called crutches. Even if I may not use them I need to understand them and will bring them out if need be at any time.


----------



## jim stevens

As I have stated, I am far from an expert dog trainer, but I can't form in my mind how you can train recall well enough to bring a dog back from a rabbit chasing without using at least a long line/collar, or an ecollar. I started out training pointers as a kid, and we trained recall with only a long line, etc, and it worked well till they took after a running rabbit or deer! When the first ecollars came out, we could immediately correct them enough even the young dogs would drop off a rabbit at the first 'back' command. I am in the country, so I've had to call mine back from rabbits, deer, coyotes in the last week. Without a perfect one word recall, my dog will end up dead in the road, just once on a deer run, following across the road, it would be the end of my training. I am not talking about sport training, but in the same manner, I have been working mine on a tug and had her fired up when a runner came down the street and the dog took after her. I stopped her immediately with one 'back'. Would she have bitten the runner who invaded her space while she was in higher drive? I don't want to find out. Can you stop one like this without corrections. I am certain that I can't. Someone may tell me I'm wrong, and I'll listen, that's how I learn.


----------



## Joby Becker

jim stevens said:


> As I have stated, I am far from an expert dog trainer, but I can't form in my mind how you can train recall well enough to bring a dog back from a rabbit chasing without using at least a long line/collar, or an ecollar. I started out training pointers as a kid, and we trained recall with only a long line, etc, and it worked well till they took after a running rabbit or deer! When the first ecollars came out, we could immediately correct them enough even the young dogs would drop off a rabbit at the first 'back' command. I am in the country, so I've had to call mine back from rabbits, deer, coyotes in the last week. Without a perfect one word recall, my dog will end up dead in the road, just once on a deer run, following across the road, it would be the end of my training. I am not talking about sport training, but in the same manner, I have been working mine on a tug and had her fired up when a runner came down the street and the dog took after her. I stopped her immediately with one 'back'. Would she have bitten the runner who invaded her space while she was in higher drive? I don't want to find out. Can you stop one like this without corrections. I am certain that I can't. Someone may tell me I'm wrong, and I'll listen, that's how I learn.


The rabbit does not count, as the dog was NOT "in drive, during the specific training for its competitive sport", so correction is OK for that...and will not have any lasting influence on the "sport" recall, even if you jack him up good for it...so if that is all you did, you can still say the dog was trained without any collar or corrective devices in his sport...


----------



## James Downey

jim stevens said:


> As I have stated, I am far from an expert dog trainer, but I can't form in my mind how you can train recall well enough to bring a dog back from a rabbit chasing without using at least a long line/collar, or an ecollar. I started out training pointers as a kid, and we trained recall with only a long line, etc, and it worked well till they took after a running rabbit or deer! When the first ecollars came out, we could immediately correct them enough even the young dogs would drop off a rabbit at the first 'back' command. I am in the country, so I've had to call mine back from rabbits, deer, coyotes in the last week. Without a perfect one word recall, my dog will end up dead in the road, just once on a deer run, following across the road, it would be the end of my training. I am not talking about sport training, but in the same manner, I have been working mine on a tug and had her fired up when a runner came down the street and the dog took after her. I stopped her immediately with one 'back'. Would she have bitten the runner who invaded her space while she was in higher drive? I don't want to find out. Can you stop one like this without corrections. I am certain that I can't. Someone may tell me I'm wrong, and I'll listen, that's how I learn.


Here's a correction for a dog that runs away to chase a rabbit. Leave. Dogs, need to packs to live. Abandoment means death. This works exceptionally well. My dogs come when called, not because I have a good cookies. But I will leave thier ass.


----------



## Geoff Empey

James Downey said:


> Here's a correction for a dog that runs away to chase a rabbit. Leave. Dogs, need to packs to live. Abandoment means death. This works exceptionally well. My dogs come when called, not because I have a good cookies. But I will leave thier ass.


I dunno I guess you've never been privy to a Beagle Hunt Trial. Many a time as a kid we'd be looking for beagles 2-3 days after the competition. Got lots of exercise trying to round those suckers up!


----------



## Laura Bollschweiler

James Downey said:


> Here's a correction for a dog that runs away to chase a rabbit. Leave. Dogs, need to packs to live. Abandoment means death. This works exceptionally well. My dogs come when called, not because I have a good cookies. But I will leave thier ass.


And when they're good and ready and had their fill of doing whatever it was they wanted to do, they make the choice to come back. Is that how it works in their minds?

Laura


----------



## James Downey

Laura Bollschweiler said:


> And when they're good and ready and had their fill of doing whatever it was they wanted to do, they make the choice to come back. Is that how it works in their minds?
> 
> Laura


 
Come back to what? I did not say I waited, I said I would leave.


----------



## Brian McQuain

James Downey said:


> Come back to what? I did not say I waited, I said I would leave.


 
So whats the point here? Leave them and be done with them?


----------



## Nicole Stark

James Downey said:


> Here's a correction for a dog that runs away to chase a rabbit. Leave. Dogs, need to packs to live. Abandoment means death. This works exceptionally well. My dogs come when called, not because I have a good cookies. But I will leave thier ass.


Yeah, that works but not always and certainly not so with highly independent, self sufficient dogs. My leaving simply enables the mastiff more rapid and unencumbered access to whatever it is that she wants. When she's done she finds her way back.

BTW, I have left my dog. She got out of the boat and took off so I left her. On 4 wheeler trips, same thing. I leave her after a few calls. Low and behold, who shows up later all frothy and muscled up? Willow. She could care less if I left her. She's really a houndy version of a mastiff.

Nevertheless, there is a coolness about her self sufficiency and independence. Very different from any other dog I've owned. She's beautiful and amazing to watch when she's just doing what she likes and lives to do.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

I think most dogs would prefer to be corrected on an e-collar for not coming rather than be left and possibly "corrected" by a car. :-k


----------



## Brian McQuain

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> The real ones are going to nail you in a blink of an eye and they don't make a sound.
> T


Wanna try that observation out with my noisy as hell GSD's?


----------



## Nicole Stark

Maren Bell Jones said:


> I think most dogs would prefer to be corrected on an e-collar for not coming rather than be left and possibly "corrected" by a car. :-k


There's no roads where I leave my dog.


----------



## Brian McQuain

James Downey said:


> Here's a correction for a dog that runs away to chase a rabbit. Leave. Dogs, need to packs to live. Abandoment means death. This works exceptionally well. My dogs come when called, not because I have a good cookies. But I will leave thier ass.


 
The majority of the sled dogs I used to work with would leave if given the chance, and never come back. A few of them did break free, never to return. We would do our best chasing with snowmobiles/quads and tracking them, but apparently they had no survival instinct, because they could care less, and off into the sunset they went. Or maybe they got eaten by the many predators living here.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Nicole Stark said:


> There's no roads where I leave my dog.


Or bear, mountain lion, porcupine...


----------



## Nicole Stark

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Or bear, mountain lion, porcupine...


Ha ha, so what, are you now the dog leaving police? What difference does it make to you where she has been left? Besides you might want to know a little more about what we have up here as predators before you make your judgements about what could be harmful to the dog. Bear, has and always will be my biggest concern. It is for any human in that environment and it wouldn't be any different for a dog whether they're left, have run off, or are on an e collar, my property, on leash, or whatever.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Having pondered that question for a while, and having just come home from a Bob Bailey seminar... James I will let you know how it works out! The more I think about it, the more I think it's possible, but to simply think that some thing is or is not possible does not make it so. 

I've started my own personal little hobby project, I've code named it Project Club Sandwich just to add some motivation for me to stick to it. To a degree it's a personal challenge to test some of my thoughts. How far can I get training alone, or for the most part as I haven't had the benefit of being in a club for a while, training one of my dogs in Sch and the other in FR while eliminating corrections (which I have absolutely no issues with from any emotional point of view and I probably like them too much, but the longer I do this the longer I feel they are slowing down the learning to the level of proficiency I want and yes becoming a crutch along the lines of what James is babbling about).


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Joby Becker said:


> There are about 15 dog training places that train pet dogs in my area that are of the 100% positive method type. There was a good run of 4-5 yrs that I was training a lot of pet dogs for people. Almost all of them have gone through at least one, sometimes 3-4 "classes" locally, and I get called because the dogs are not listening to the owners like they thought they would. I am working with 2 dogs currently that are like this. In all cases the dogs know what they are being told to do, will perform to high degree with food or toys present, but in most cases they will not comply very consistently at all without the presence of a reward of some kind. I realize these are pet dogs and not sport dogs, with less than great trainers, but I have not been sold on the positive only method because of this. Even you yourself state that you use punishment for stuff other than what is expected on the trial field, when the dog is not in drive. Which to me means that those uses of "punishments" DO carry over into the other things you do.


My opinion regarding this, I think the average pet owner is done a major dis-service when they are brain washed into thinking they should only train positively or they'll make a monster out of their dog or destroy them. They are set up to fail. Training purely positively (in a matter that is effective) is a lifestyle. I think when you want certain results quickly, under certain circumstances, your chances of success are much higher with the use of corrections and I think many pet owners especially with certain dogs fall into this category.


----------



## jim stevens

Nicole Stark said:


> There's no roads where I leave my dog.


Having spent quite a bit of time in Alaska, that would work in a lot of areas, the odds of a car hitting them would be zero. No chance of another human picking them up either!

Not quite so good in my part of Mo. A 7.5 ft grizz would make a pretty permanent correction though.


----------



## James Downey

Brian McQuain said:


> The majority of the sled dogs I used to work with would leave if given the chance, and never come back. A few of them did break free, never to return. We would do our best chasing with snowmobiles/quads and tracking them, but apparently they had no survival instinct, because they could care less, and off into the sunset they went. Or maybe they got eaten by the many predators living here.


And when a few a break free....they have a pack now don't they.


----------



## Dana McMahan

This is all great in theory.... but like most theories where are the videos and what are the trial scores of all these purely positive trainers at high level competition?? 

I'm open minded and use a mixture of methods in my training but of all the purely positive trainers I've done seminars with, the majority have HORRIBLY trained dogs and don't do competitions, at all. They just write books and give seminars.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

If there are never any consequences for bad behavior you end up with a bunch of freaks. Same applies to people.


----------



## Christopher Smith

> This is all great in theory.... but like most theories where are the videos and what are the trial scores of all these purely positive trainers at high level competition?


Scores!?! Hahaha... You must be snorting powered unicorn horn! Thanks for the laugh!

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Nicole Stark

jim stevens said:


> Having spent quite a bit of time in Alaska, that would work in a lot of areas, the odds of a car hitting them would be zero. No chance of another human picking them up either!
> 
> Not quite so good in my part of Mo. A 7.5 ft grizz would make a pretty permanent correction though.


You know it! I've had 3 bear encounters with brown bear in about 5-6 years. This is something you cannot explain to someone in a way that would make any kind of impact on them until they have found themselves in that situation. I have always been open about the fact that Willow may find that fate someday. I did have exhaustive discussions about e collar use for her as well with this issue. The assessment was that the dog did not know the command as well as I thought and therefore did not obey it under distraction. 

I really should make a video of what happens and where she goes/how quickly it is to lose her. The vegetation is so tall, so dense, and so Devil's Clubish that not only cannot I not follow her visually, I cannot do so on an ATV either or on foot. To be honest with you, seeing 2' wide trampled paths all over the places gives me the creeps. I don't want to be digging around in that mess trying to figure out where she went. 

The best advantage I have is to ride at her pace and watch her behavior closely. As long as I catch it before she starts, I can interrupt it early on. I suppose at the end of the day, these are all just excuses for incomplete or poor training. Either that, or it's reality and simply my method for keeping it in check.


----------



## jim stevens

I like it up there, being a hunter/fisherman/wilderness lover. I would move to Alaska in a heartbeat, but I think I'd have to give up a perfect wife to do it!


----------



## James Downey

Hey I ain't asking any of ya to believe me. I am cool. I do not have a problem with a dog wanting to be with me. I mean with your population of elite learners and obviously extremely dangerous training conditions....I see why you use the e-collar as a crutch. I mean you said yourselves, alls it takes is a cute little bunny rabbit and all your training unravels.


----------



## James Downey

James Downey said:


> Okay so the people that use tables, e-collars, pinch collars. I have trained my 18 mos. old dog without a leash or a collar. even in tracking. Just because 2years ago I removed all correction collars. So I figure most trainers "add tools" when they cannot figure a problem out. So, I removed the tools.
> 
> 
> 
> Just as the people who use them claim that they are tools and can be abused. That not having an understanding of thier application is what makes them a problem.
> 
> I can go one step further, and say that people who rely on the use of Tools may very well understand how to use them. and they may, but what my experience has taught me. is most people are introducing tools because they suck at controlling the dogs access to resources.


 
does this say anything about PP? 

It says that people introduce crutches....for lack of a better thought. Nothing about PP. They cannot seem to keep the dog from either getting, lunging for, running from them to go get, trying to cheat to get, sneaking to get to the reward.

Here is a simple example. If your dog came on a field and I cracked a whip and you did not have a leash, would it come bite my sleeve? What if you gave it a command to not bite? would the dog still bite. enter the leash, the pinch collar. What if I told you, Your dog is not getting trained, your just using a crutch to keep the dog from rewarding himself. That's not training, that's managment.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

jim stevens said:


> I like it up there, being a hunter/fisherman/wilderness lover. I would move to Alaska in a heartbeat, but I think I'd have to give up a perfect wife to do it!



We have different priorities evidently.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> In my experience a dog is not going to bite and put puncture wounds in someone without doing it aggressively...if you are talking a real bite in real life, as opposed to an accident, like a missed tug or something..
> 
> I thought you trained SCH, you mentioned a club previously...
> 
> How do you train for biting then? not sport, but for real?


 
Yep, spent a little over a year with a schutzhund club and decided we weren't compatible. Loved the training theory though. Have had dogs bite and leave puncture wounds that were never trained in bite work or frustration aggression. I don't train in biting. Never had to, Trained to stop the bite. My first dog that I took to a club for sport training they claimed had too much aggression and meant it. She didn't consider it a game. I don't think you ought to have to train aggression-breed it. So the criteria for a bite is whether they leave puncture wounds. Is that tested in law enforcment or military? In sport work how do you tell with sleeves and suits? Does it really matter?

All this talk of purely positive. No one said anything about purely positive. It was about controlling access to resources and potential for reward. Nor did I say that correction in drive on something else has no effect on the in drive work which is the basis for the competitive sport. To the contrary it does. If you corrected the dog in that drive state of mind while he was doing something else, it most likely would have some effect on the other in drive work. Handler I worked with today has a littermate to mine that goes bonkers prey with the stock. He's learning control with NILIF and access denial. She said at home he is the same way with the water hose. I told her to start setting up her control games with the water hose. No access unless he works for it and remains calm. She spent seven years with this bloodline of dogs [the sire] and knows that punishment doesn't work for the state of mind that we want to obtain. I'm not necessarily against correction or punishment. Its not a warm and fuzzy issue. I go for what gives me the most consistent and reliable performance. My lesson for this and the e-collar is what happened with one dog in the reverse. She was fence running with the dog next door and barking. Obviously, it was more about prey/chase more than anything. They fixed it with the e-collar. I haven't been able to get her to engage livestock since. I've often thought a couple of zaps with bouvier would fix her main issue but what will I lose in the translation?

I don't think the e-collar to stop a behavior is an issue. I also now live in the land of coyote and deer. With my young dogs, they have one area that they run in with long lines and me out there. I have spent all of their puppy lives recalling them off play and frapping and chasing each other. Also will down them while they are chasing each other full tilt boogie. They don't know life running free. They stay attuned to me. I did one test session with Rhemy and walked out of the house with no leash. It didn't occur to him to run off. We did training call offs of the stock and heeled back to the back door and in we went. He's always looking for reward and offering behaviors. The call off is the number one behavior to master for what I do. I have to be able to call off the dog or unhook him from the stock. So I take advantage of every opportunity to call him off. He will actually start focusing on something out in the field and suddenly look back at me anticipating that I may call him. 

Terrasita


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sally Crunkleton said:


> If there are never any consequences for bad behavior you end up with a bunch of freaks. Same applies to people.


 
There is a consequence. Dog doesn't get what he wants. Call it negative reinforcement--i.e. taking away something the dog wants. There are four quandrants---positive reinforcement, positive punishment, negative reinforcement, negative punishment. 

T


----------



## Travis Ragin

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> I don't train in biting. Never had to, Trained to stop the bite.


:grin::grin::grin:


t


----------



## Travis Ragin

Gillian Schuler said:


> It worked 99% but I got to be able to *read* my dog by doing it.
> 
> 
> 
> One certainly gets to be able to *read* the dog better without crutches but it can be a nerve-wracking experience for both without.


*There ^

*Right there is what is slowly being lost over the years up to today ....amidst all the hoopla about which training philosophy to follow and "in drive" talk that is debated.


Dogs are simple,honest creatures....they don't lie.......learning to read/observe them does take time,but they can very much communicate with a human without any tools needed....just a human and a dog.


----------



## Nicole Stark

jim stevens said:


> I like it up there, being a hunter/fisherman/wilderness lover. I would move to Alaska in a heartbeat, but I think I'd have to give up a perfect wife to do it!


Certainly don't ever do that O. Not much beats having a perfect spouse to share your life with.


----------



## Nicole Stark

James Downey said:


> Here is a simple example. If your dog came on a field and I cracked a whip and you did not have a leash, would it come bite my sleeve? What if you gave it a command to not bite? would the dog still bite. enter the leash, the pinch collar. What if I told you, Your dog is not getting trained, your just using a crutch to keep the dog from rewarding himself. That's not training, that's managment.


Yes, and no whip would be necessary to induce that and she would bite with anything on her. If I told her not to bite, I'd still choose to rely on aids for safety reasons.

Would I like for it to be another way? Yes, certainly but I'm not too proud to admit that I don't yet have the ability to control my dog properly without these tools I spoke of earlier. It takes time, you know that. I'll keep at it and work on finding the balance that suits the dog and goals I have for her. I'm willing to see where it goes.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> There is a consequence. Dog doesn't get what he wants. Call it negative reinforcement--i.e. taking away something the dog wants. There are four quandrants---positive reinforcement, positive punishment, negative reinforcement, negative punishment.
> 
> T


This I am aware of, I was referring to all the talk of "purely positive". I would consider a consequence negative.


----------



## Travis Ragin

James Downey said:


> Okay so the people that use tables, e-collars, pinch collars. I have trained my 18 mos. old dog without a leash or a collar. even in tracking. Just because 2years ago I removed all correction collars. So I figure most trainers "add tools" when they cannot figure a problem out. So, I removed the tools.
> 
> 
> 
> Just as the people who use them claim that they are tools and can be abused. That not having an understanding of thier application is what makes them a problem.
> 
> I can go one step further, and say that people who rely on the use of Tools may very well understand how to use them. and they may, but what my experience has taught me. is most people are introducing tools because they suck at controlling the dogs access to resources.


I'm on board with your post too.

My perspective is just a little different in that I see it more as a lack of *Leadership* today that is the main crux of what leads to them ...."them" being,different gadgets that different people have varying needs and comfort levels about using...........( as a Crutch-not Tool)

Some people's dogs do probably see them as mere resource providers and not as actual/natural Pack Leader.......that they would actually follow,if given a natural choice.


Wolves and People are *born natural leaders*...though of course not every wolf or person is.But I feel that every person can very much *become one* in their dogs eyes if they can convince them.....and the more they observe you/me using them(crutches),they will realize more & more that you/me need them to make them do as you/me ask,instead of doing it *just because* you asked.....as their leader.








I truly respect the fact that James Downey decided to see if he was his dogs leader or not by tossing his leash and collar and *proving* it to them both.I'm pretty sure that any future dog(s) he raises will be taught leadership from the start in the same way.This one reason why I've always challenged people to do this ^ or enter their dog into something like a non-baited weight-pull trial.(I know ther's no section for it here-but it does exist:mrgreen.........barely takes any training to test
(MAYBE a quick harness acclimation,Maybe),but you'll definitely be able to see something about where you stand as leader in your dogs eye.

t


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Nicole Stark said:


> Ha ha, so what, are you now the dog leaving police? What difference does it make to you where she has been left? Besides you might want to know a little more about what we have up here as predators before you make your judgements about what could be harmful to the dog. Bear, has and always will be my biggest concern. It is for any human in that environment and it wouldn't be any different for a dog whether they're left, have run off, or are on an e collar, my property, on leash, or whatever.


Nicole, it was actually James and not you I was addressing with my previous comment about a car "correcting" a dog. Either way, the same point goes. There always can be consequences to decisions. Some of them come from an e-collar, some may come from a car, some may come from unfriendly wildlife. I would think the dog could prefer to live another day after a correction via e-collar.

But now that you mention it, if I am the "dog leaving police" now, why yes, it IS actually pretty stupid to leave your dog in the woods, in the park, wherever to somehow teach it a lesson.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> There is a consequence. Dog doesn't get what he wants. Call it negative reinforcement--i.e. taking away something the dog wants. T


That's actually negative punishment.


----------



## Brian McQuain

James Downey said:


> And when a few a break free....they have a pack now don't they.


 
I meant the few who broke free, not all at once. So, no, not a pack.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Ariel Peldunas said:


> That's actually negative punishment.


 
Good catch. It defies my sense of things to think of escape training as negative reinforcement. I slip and switch them if I don't watch it.

T


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Travis Ragin said:


> I'm on board with your post too.
> 
> My perspective is just a little different in that I see it more as a lack of *Leadership* today that is the main crux of what leads to them ...."them" being,different gadgets that different people have varying needs and comfort levels about using...........( as a Crutch-not Tool)
> 
> Some people's dogs do probably see them as mere resource providers and not as actual/natural Pack Leader.......that they would actually follow,if given a natural choice.
> 
> 
> Wolves and People are *born natural leaders*...though of course not every wolf or person is.But I feel that every person can very much *become one* in their dogs eyes if they can convince them.....and the more they observe you/me using them(crutches),they will realize more & more that you/me need them to make them do as you/me ask,instead of doing it *just because* you asked.....as their leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I truly respect the fact that James Downey decided to see if he was his dogs leader or not by tossing his leash and collar and *proving* it to them both.I'm pretty sure that any future dog(s) he raises will be taught leadership from the start in the same way.This one reason why I've always challenged people to do this ^ or enter their dog into something like a non-baited weight-pull trial.(I know ther's no section for it here-but it does exist:mrgreen.........barely takes any training to test
> (MAYBE a quick harness acclimation,Maybe),but you'll definitely be able to see something about where you stand as leader in your dogs eye.
> 
> t


I do not disagree with being a pack leader at all....I actually put this first before starting any formal training. It's their instinct to follow, and if there is no leader they will take over.

I am wanting some clarity on all this, and my questions are not to cause conflict- but to be sure I understand what is the real meaning behind this thread. So...

This started in reference to tables, collars, etc....but would the whole "pack leader" role need to be established way before one even thinks about using such tools/crutches? I would think if the dog respects you from the start, then the foundation for actual training is already done.

This thread also seemed to move to corrections/no corrections, positive/negative, and so on...but don't pack leaders give corrections all the time- whether mild or harsh? 

Is the whole point about ONLY relying on tools/crutches to aid in training and replacing the handler/dog relationship with them, OR is this about those that use them cruelly vs truly using them to go to another level or experience?

I know the world is not all sunshine and marshmallows and some folks still use the "do it or else" type of training, but for me, by the time a tool/crutch is introduced my dog already trusts me and wants to go where I go and please me by doing whatever. If I ever turned to leave my dog- he would go through fire to get back to me- if he didn't then I have seriously screwed up. 

It seems to have gone off track, even though all of the above can be tied together.


----------



## Joby Becker

James Downey said:


> does this say anything about PP?
> 
> It says that people introduce crutches....for lack of a better thought. Nothing about PP. They cannot seem to keep the dog from either getting, lunging for, running from them to go get, trying to cheat to get, sneaking to get to the reward.


PP? what? who?

These guys competed pretty regular at my (sporty) PP competitions, usually brought about 5-8 dogs from their training group, As did a bunch of other people/training groups. Advanced levels were always offleash, flat collar only, with control required. Are you now stating how "PP" people train and how thier dogs are...=;

anyhow this is pretty typical of the dogs I would see at my events that would compete at the higher level. The second dog did compete at a couple shows I did, and was trained with heavy use of the pinch collar. Every PP event I have been too has offlead division.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVx6Dlh8Gzo


----------



## Nicole Stark

Maren Bell Jones said:


> But now that you mention it, if I am the "dog leaving police" now, why yes, it IS actually pretty stupid to leave your dog in the woods, in the park, wherever to somehow teach it a lesson.


Lesson? Psh. I knew that dog was going to find me, I just wasn't waiting for her anymore and left. Teaching her a lesson (In my mind that equates to training) would have involved me actually working with her to stop that behavior to begin with. There's no lesson to be learned by leaving dogs who roam like that. Anyone who replied would and did concur on that point.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Good catch. It defies my sense of things to think of escape training as negative reinforcement. I slip and switch them if I don't watch it.
> 
> T


I know the feeling. After teaching about it for a while and always having to provide examples of each, I would have thought it would have sunk in but I still have to take a second to make sure I know what I'm talking about.


----------



## Travis Ragin

Sally Crunkleton said:


> This started in reference to tables, collars, etc....but would the whole "pack leader" role need to be established way before one even thinks about using such tools/crutches? I would think if the dog respects you from the start, then the foundation for actual training is already done.


O In all honesty......I can say that is the real meaning behind my post in this thread.Ms. Crunkleton


Some of the other stuff you mentioned I don't think I brought up-so don't Tie me to them!...... but I do want to try to answer some questions that you put up







> but don't pack leaders give corrections all the time- whether mild or harsh?


Not really,there can only be one alpha in the pack/pride/flock......one direction.............If the leader is being challenged all the time,it's because someone else wants to be leader.








Sally Crunkleton said:


> If I ever turned to leave my dog- he would go through fire to get back to me- *if he didn't then* *I have seriously screwed up*
> .


Couldn't end this chat on a more positive note because I luv this statement!

O And, absolutely consider this the ultimate that I could ask for my dog.........what varies,is dog owner's definition of _"through fire" _for their dog_._.....be it woods/podium/home defense......or ,Nicole Starks dog finding his way back through the Alaskan wilderness,etc.. etc........



t


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Thanks for the responses. We seem to be on a very similar page. As far as the other stuff, I know you weren't in on that- and really I am not, just trying to understand everyone's point through the muddy waters 

One last thing...
"Not really,there can only be one alpha in the pack/pride/flock......one direction.............If the leader is being challenged all the time,it's because someone else wants to be leader."

I agree there can only be one, but if the alpha is being challenged all the time, I would think something about that animal's state of being was saying it was no longer in charge. On the flip side, if there is an occasional testing of rank, the true alpha shuts it down quickly, am I correct?


----------



## Joby Becker

I do not think a dog disobeying a command or doing something wrong, (where some people might use a correction), equals the dog "challenging" the leader of the pack's status...

I have seen dogs challenge for that, and it is not pretty.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Nicole Stark said:


> Lesson? Psh. I knew that dog was going to find me, I just wasn't waiting for her anymore and left. Teaching her a lesson (In my mind that equates to training) would have involved me actually working with her to stop that behavior to begin with. There's no lesson to be learned by leaving dogs who roam like that. Anyone who replied would and did concur on that point.


So if you left your dog in the woods and she was killed by a bear...what would have been *your* lesson? :-k


----------



## Travis Ragin

Maren Bell Jones said:


> So if you left your dog in the woods and she was killed by a bear...what would have been *your* lesson? :-k


I see this more as *her dog leaving her*....in the Woods....what if Nicole Stark encountered the bear?


*He *should learn a lesson from that.


----------



## Joby Becker

Save money on food?

My money is on the DDB

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mkx1T4ckl0U


----------



## Nicole Stark

Maren Bell Jones said:


> So if you left your dog in the woods and she was killed by a bear...what would have been *your* lesson? :-k


Maren, no offense but do you get off by asking stupid, bitchy questions just to try and make a point of some sort? This dog, me for that matter, could get killed out there at any time. Care to go round and round with this or anything else with me, then you need to know that you're barking up the wrong tree. 

Your game, ain't mine. I don't have any inclination to engage in your drama.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Joby Becker said:


> I do not think a dog disobeying a command or doing something wrong, (where some people might use a correction), equals the dog "challenging" the leader of the pack's status...
> 
> I have seen dogs challenge for that, and it is not pretty.


I agree, I was meaning the occasional testing of boundaries/or disobeying a little to see what they can get away with. A full on challenge for rank would be very horrific.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Travis Ragin said:


> I see this more as *her dog leaving her*....in the Woods....what if Nicole Stark encountered the bear?
> 
> 
> *He *should learn a lesson from that.


Wait...what? Her dog runs away and gets separated...so she leaves the woods totally? They say even the smartest dog is about on intelligence level of a 2-3 year old. What if your 3 year old threw a temper tantrum and ran away in the middle of the woods? Would you go after them or leave them in the woods with bears and all, hoping for them to find you? 

If any of my dogs ever made that choice, they would never be allowed the opportunity to roam off leash ever again. If they do it once, they will do it again. Long line or e-collar on always. Call it a crutch, but I'd prefer my dogs not getting killed if it's all the same to everybody.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

I have seen ruthless boardroom ceo types come home and not so literally take orders from their little schnoodle. Training a dog has more to do with knowing how to influence behaviour then being some mythical natural alpha wolf. Some people put far too much emotion into their relationships with dogs and completely over complicate and distort what is a very simple yet loveable creature who only cares about one thing, what's in it for me. You start thinking that your dog should sit for you, or come back to you, or bring back some stupid wooden object to you because he respects you, you're doing yourself and him a huge disservice. They're not little people in fur coats with moral codes. 




Travis Ragin said:


> I'm on board with your post too.
> 
> My perspective is just a little different in that I see it more as a lack of *Leadership* today that is the main crux of what leads to them ...."them" being,different gadgets that different people have varying needs and comfort levels about using...........( as a Crutch-not Tool)
> 
> Some people's dogs do probably see them as mere resource providers and not as actual/natural Pack Leader.......that they would actually follow,if given a natural choice.
> 
> 
> Wolves and People are *born natural leaders*...though of course not every wolf or person is.But I feel that every person can very much *become one* in their dogs eyes if they can convince them.....and the more they observe you/me using them(crutches),they will realize more & more that you/me need them to make them do as you/me ask,instead of doing it *just because* you asked.....as their leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I truly respect the fact that James Downey decided to see if he was his dogs leader or not by tossing his leash and collar and *proving* it to them both.I'm pretty sure that any future dog(s) he raises will be taught leadership from the start in the same way.This one reason why I've always challenged people to do this ^ or enter their dog into something like a non-baited weight-pull trial.(I know ther's no section for it here-but it does exist:mrgreen.........barely takes any training to test
> (MAYBE a quick harness acclimation,Maybe),but you'll definitely be able to see something about where you stand as leader in your dogs eye.
> 
> t


----------



## Nicole Stark

Travis Ragin said:


> I see this more as *her dog leaving her*....in the Woods....what if Nicole Stark encountered the bear?
> 
> 
> *He *should learn a lesson from that.


This is correct. She does leave. Now that snipe of mine? I can't get that dog to go much more than a few feet of me unless she's searching for something. Regarding the what if? I know what happens as does the dog, both of us have been charged by or had encounters with brown bear. 

My encounter was when I interrupted a black bear tree that was done by a brown bear. I didn't even see the brown bear initially as I was looking up in the tree at the black bear. Then I heard the brown bear, it stood up, then back down, and started huffing and clacking its jaws. I was on the 4 wheeler and immediately left but as I made my way around the bend in the trail I looked back to see the bear standing upright again and then in a flash it was down on all 4s plowing through the brush after me.

The DDB encountered a brown bear and two sub adults just off a river bank that led into a small pool where otter were swimming. She entered the pool and as she reached the other side she entered the grass. I can still recall the noise (first huffing, then a roar) and feeling I got when I realized that she was in there with a brown bear. I screamed at her like I've never screamed before. 

Don described the dogs reaction when his encountered animals under such circumstances. His dog in that video with Dave did not show the behavior he described but concerning what I saw in my own his description of it was dead on. The bear circled around and had our departure route been up river we would have been screwed because she exited a short distance up river and started back down toward the location of the boat which needed to travel down river.

I've got pictures of the bear from both encounters. They're not great pictures but I think they're on my hard drive.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Wait...what? Her dog runs away and gets separated...so she leaves the woods totally?


Leaves the woods totally? No. It seems to never end out there. There's no leaving this woods. 

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=alex...03&start=72&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:9,s:72,i:337

And really, did you not notice I explained to James that it's not effective to do that to a dog? If it honestly matters to you I was purposely running the piss out of that dog to get her back. In fact one of the pictures in my gallery was taken on the day when the boat left shore while she was off doing something else and didn't return when I called her. It's the one of her partially standing in the river. I took that just before I picked her up.



It's easy to assume a lot when you weren't there. It's also easy to take issue with something just because you find something about it objectionable. But the fact is you might be surprised to see what the sound of a leaving boat motor or ATV does to a dog whose nosing around in a gut pile or looking for something more interesting to do.


----------



## Travis Ragin

genuine smile......ah c'mon now Chooch,I didn't say half that stuff you got me quoted on there.

I just don't think the Alpha/Leader wolf is a myth,and you feel the opposite.......I like the other 99% of your views and your ability to *read* *DOG *too much, so it's no biggie to chat about


Who were the scientists or researchers names who published/announced their findings about this pack dynamic being false?



I remember reading some of it when it first came out,but it's been a while so maybe I'll read back on it,and follow up to today with those who've carried on their findings.Is/Was there a book(s)?


thanks,
t


----------



## rick smith

re: "Who were the scientists or researchers names who published/announced their findings about this pack dynamic being false?"

Mech for one and MANY others 
..could prob find out a lot without even buying a book

and that doesn't just go for wolves either  feral dog packs do not have rival pack members trying to climb the ladder and dump the "pack leader" either 
- believe whatever you want but start a thread about "pack leadership" and you might be humbled 

- fact is, if you were a true "pack leader" your dog should probably sniff your balls when you recall it ... it probably won't unless your weird 

dogs need leadership but the pack leadership theory of dog training is based on a myth regardless of how many people swear by it or how many TV guys make money off it because it seems so simple to follow 
... my guess is it'll die out in another 30 years ... that's about how far behind dog training is in many areas 
...so much for my 01cent opinion 

an in depth discussion about pack leadership might even blow up a bigger shit storm than a little bit of "table talk" 
... but count me out - cause no one is gonna change their mind


----------



## susan tuck

James: Your approach is interesting. I am wondering with regards to tracking, how do you teach the dog to pull into the track, not hectic, but track in drive? How about articles, how did you teach article indication?


----------



## will fernandez

http://alexadry.hubpages.com/hub/David-Mechs-Theory-on-the-Alpha-Role

Rick could you share some other names that would make for some free time reading for me..


----------



## rick smith

Will 
hope you're asking to dig deeper rather than start a debate 
anyway, try this link (it's an interview); it might add some more insight .... 
the guy is primarily in to felines, but (imo) he's no dummy when it comes to canines either 
http://www.ttlntl.co.uk/2/ChatHist/peter_neville.htm


----------



## will fernandez

rick 

no debate...I left behind the apha thing a while back.


----------



## rick smith

Will
checked the link
-- sorry, not much relevant meat in it :-(
i met him when he was over here in Japan, so i know where his head's at.
i'll try and get something with some more beef when i can...


----------



## rick smith

here's a free link (if it still works) that is an excerpt from her fairly expensive book 
light read but i thought it was interesting :

http://www.nonlineardogs.com/100MostSillyPart1.html

with some theory on the domestic canine evolution process, and btw, she spent MANY years observing wolves in the wild


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Has anyone seen the Liam Neeson movie "The Grey"
About the Survivors of an Alaskan plane wreck being stalked by a pack of wolves. Scary place Alaska ;-)


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Thomas Barriano said:


> Has anyone seen the Liam Neeson movie "The Grey"
> About the Survivors of an Alaskan plane wreck being stalked by a pack of wolves. Scary place Alaska ;-)


I liked that movie, but I think they should have stayed with the plane!


----------



## Joby Becker

Thomas Barriano said:


> Has anyone seen the Liam Neeson movie "The Grey"
> About the Survivors of an Alaskan plane wreck being stalked by a pack of wolves. Scary place Alaska ;-)


Thomas, this is a current thread in the training discussion section, of a working dog forum..please refrain from this type of post here


----------



## Brian McQuain

Thomas Barriano said:


> Has anyone seen the Liam Neeson movie "The Grey"
> About the Survivors of an Alaskan plane wreck being stalked by a pack of wolves. Scary place Alaska ;-)


 
2 hours of my life...gone...such a waste


----------



## Joby Becker

I DL'd "the grey" and skimmed in on the computer...once I saw the wolves. I deleted it..

Another "great" wolf movie is FROZEN... LOL.... worst movie I have seen in years...


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Brian McQuain said:


> 2 hours of my life...gone...such a waste


Did as much for Liam's movie career as it did for Alaskan tourism


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Sally Crunkleton said:


> I liked that movie, but I think they should have stayed with the plane!


Naw, traipsing along in the snow and cold and getting eaten one by one by wolves was a much better idea?
I wonder how the Liam with broken mini liquor bottles taped to his hands vs "the Grey" fight came out?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

rick smith said:


> re: "Who were the scientists or researchers names who published/announced their findings about this pack dynamic being false?"
> 
> Mech for one and MANY others
> ..could prob find out a lot without even buying a book
> 
> and that doesn't just go for wolves either  feral dog packs do not have rival pack members trying to climb the ladder and dump the "pack leader" either
> - believe whatever you want but start a thread about "pack leadership" and you might be humbled
> 
> - fact is, if you were a true "pack leader" your dog should probably sniff your balls when you recall it ... it probably won't unless your weird
> 
> dogs need leadership but the pack leadership theory of dog training is based on a myth regardless of how many people swear by it or how many TV guys make money off it because it seems so simple to follow
> ... my guess is it'll die out in another 30 years ... that's about how far behind dog training is in many areas
> ...so much for my 01cent opinion
> 
> an in depth discussion about pack leadership might even blow up a bigger shit storm than a little bit of "table talk"
> ... but count me out - cause no one is gonna change their mind


Mech didn't say it was false as far as heirarchal leadership is concerned. He said it had a familial basis. Personally, I think he had a paid gig. I can't believe anyone that has existed with multiple dogs don't see heirarchal leadership type structure. I also can't reconcile a statement like "dogs need leadership" yet the pack leadership theory of dog training [whatever that is] is based on a myth.

Terrasita


----------



## Sara Waters

Marta Wajngarten said:


> My opinion regarding this, I think the average pet owner is done a major dis-service when they are brain washed into thinking they should only train positively or they'll make a monster out of their dog or destroy them. They are set up to fail. Training purely positively (in a matter that is effective) is a lifestyle. I think when you want certain results quickly, under certain circumstances, your chances of success are much higher with the use of corrections and I think many pet owners especially with certain dogs fall into this category.


I had a quick scan through this thread and this post caught my eye as it contains a truth as I see it. 

I train my dogs for the most part without collar and leash and with positive reinforcement as do most of the people I compete with in agility and obedience that operate at a high level of success with their dogs. 

I also tend to think it is a lifestyle, with pups trained that way from the start and ingrained in the way you work with your dogs. You set them up to succeed all the time and train in small increments when they are operant. Training this way like any other way is a skill that you need to learn and understand to be effective. I suspect the average pet owner has no idea what training this way entails. It takes time and experience.

I also agree with one dog of mine in particular I used corrections to get a very quick urgent understanding in regards to a chasing scenario that was new to her and could have ended in her death. My other 5 dogs did not require this and came instantly when called. So I will absolutely use corrections under very specific situations and I will use a long line if I need to in early herding training and I certanly dont need this on every dog. 

I have no intention of ever using an e collar, prong collar as to this point in time I have never needed it. I dont think it takes me longer to train my dogs and the more I get to understand this method of training I actually think it is quick and effective, because you and your dog are tuned into it. I like the level of connection I have with my dogs and they always try their hardest and are full of joy when I train, they really enjoy learning and they do well at trials. I always come away feeling very pleased with them.


----------



## Brian McQuain

Sara Waters said:


> I always come away feeling very pleased with them.


 
Thats really what matters.


----------



## Mircea Hemu-Ha

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Mech didn't say it was false as far as heirarchal leadership is concerned. He said it had a familial basis. Personally, I think he had a paid gig. I can't believe anyone that has existed with multiple dogs don't see heirarchal leadership type structure. I also can't reconcile a statement like "dogs need leadership" yet the pack leadership theory of dog training [whatever that is] is based on a myth.


The first time i know that Mech said it was in a 2000 paper, i doubt it was for fame, since he was stating that he was wrong in the '70s. And it's not just him, every "wolf expert" i know says the same thing now.

The problem i have with the theory, any theory, is the way it's interpreted.
Dogs need leadership, i think everyone will agree with this, but what does that mean exactly ? Some people i know spit in their dogs bowl, so the dog knows it's the boss's food & water. Others will frequently wake up the dog, just so the dog knows who's the boss.
It may seam stupid to most on this board, but others with little experience in dealing with dogs might find such arguments valid.


----------



## rick smith

Mircea....
you know some weird people !

don't know for sure but have worked directly with well over a hundred dog owners ... never met one that frequently woke their dog to show em who is the boss ?? ... please send me their email address 

what is leadership ?
pretty simple concept to me
somebody shows the way and somebody else follows ... dogs, people, etc
- i think that always applies to training, but sometimes applies when working. when my dog is tracking i'm pretty much the follower and he is the leader

funny, but years ago i actually did do an experiment spitting in dog food bowls ... but i AM weird 
try doing one and we can compare results


----------



## Scott Williams

The two best trainers/competitors I know of that will not use physical corrections are Susan Garrett and Sylvia Trkman. Both have won world agility titles and have been on world teams multiple times with high drive dogs. Neither owns dogs bred to bite humans. I think it would take someone of this high caliber to enter protection sports successfully to change how many of us train. Training exclusively in a reward based system with no physical corrections is a ground up approach that is not very effective when trying to cross over with a dog that has had a traditional approach up to that point. 
Bart Bellons methods are equally less effective when trying to lay it over years of another methodology. I have met very few trainers that have the experience to take a puppy and train it from the ground up to the highest level of competition several times over (in spite of genetics) with any methodology.


----------



## rick smith

Scott

imo there is a world of difference in the training required to have a canine engage (bite/grip/hold on) a human and ANY other type of dog sport
dogs are dogs because their genetics evolved to NOT aggress humans. when you train counter to that you are essentially training an aggressive behavior they were NOT born with
(i know many will disagree with this but it is one of the BASIC genetic makeups of all DOMESTIC dogs)

and doing it successfully does not require a "new awareness" of a reward based (whatever that is) training system

to me it's simple :
either you train operantly, you train compulsively or you mix/match both
...corrections are found in all three

show me a WELL TRAINED dog that never needed a correction and i'll show you a super dog...if it will engage and disengage a human on command it's more than super imo
- whether the corrections along the way were viewed as punishment by someone who didn't know the dog would be irrelevant to me and not worth a discussion


----------



## Scott Williams

I was not saying they train without punishment. I wrote that they train without physical correction.


----------



## Christopher Smith

> I I wrote that they train without physical correction.


Why do they train without physical correction? Humanity? Religion? Daddy issues?



Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Christopher Smith said:


> Why do they train without physical correction? Humanity? Religion? Daddy issues?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


Social Pressure? 
We were working my girl Arya last night on bite suit legs and using whip cracking to get a little aggression/excitement.
Hold her by the fur saver, agitate and send, then whistle recall between legs, hold and agitate etc. The last round I reward with tug play. This young guy (GI or high school kid I can't tell anymore) comes over and wants to know why we're beating the dog? 
I guess once he saw her with a mouth full of tug and her tailing wagging he realized she wasn't being "beaten".


----------



## John Wolf

Christopher Smith said:


> Why do they train without physical correction? Humanity? Religion? Daddy issues?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


Haha...that is always my question. Corrections are life. I know life has corrected me a few times. When I wrestled, if I did something wrong the other wrestler would "correct" me for doing that behavior. When I stick my hand on a hot stove, life corrected me. Physical pain is a crucial aspect of learning for all creatures. 

My two cents


----------



## Joby Becker

rick smith;345102
(i know many will disagree with this but it is one of the BASIC genetic makeups of all DOMESTIC dogs)
[/QUOTE said:


> LOL you know me Rick I have to disagree.
> 
> If you were to say MOST, I would agree...


----------



## susan tuck

All I know is I have happy, well adjusted dogs, all with whom I enjoy wonderful bond/relationship. 

I train using affection, discipline, corrections, positive motivation, force, many different things including leash, long line, ecollar, fursaver, harness, ball, tug, bait, toy, etc..

I see no reason to switch to 100% of ANY method because what I do works for me and my dogs, and frankly I am more than happy with the results.

I couldn't care less if someone sees what I do as using crutches, because it works for me. To each their own, many ways to the top of the mountain.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Christopher Smith said:


> Why do they train without physical correction? Humanity? Religion? Daddy issues?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


SG has been around for decades. She started out as a traditional methods Ob trainer. When she started in agility when the sport first came to Amrica she was still using traditional methods and applying corrections. Through persuit of the perfect performance (max speed and accuracy) she found she had better results when instead of correcting unwanted behaviours she trained by building value for the desired behaviours and preventing the undesired ones. At one point she trained with Bob Bailey and that further confirmed this and she has applied much of his work into her training. She doesn't use corrections because she gets much better results when training without them, no daddy issues. 

I don't know much about the history of Silvia, but she is also very creative and good at creating reliable behaviours without ever having to use corrections.


----------



## Joby Becker

John Wolf said:


> Haha...that is always my question. Corrections are life. I know life has corrected me a few times. When I wrestled, if I did something wrong the other wrestler would "correct" me for doing that behavior. When I stick my hand on a hot stove, life corrected me. Physical pain is a crucial aspect of learning for all creatures.
> 
> My two cents


my swim coach used to paddle us with the kickboards. or make us duck walk around the pool sometimes up to 10 times around...

He also made one guy swim a 1000 yards of butterfly, right before a sectional tournament, for mooning cars on the bus down there...that kid had 3 events too... dude was an effective coach. produced quite a few great swimmers...


----------



## Christopher Smith

Marta Wajngarten said:


> SG has been around for decades. She started out as a traditional methods Ob trainer. When she started in agility when the sport first came to Amrica she was still using traditional methods and applying corrections. Through persuit of the perfect performance (max speed and accuracy) she found she had better results when instead of correcting unwanted behaviours she trained by building value for the desired behaviours and preventing the undesired ones. At one point she trained with Bob Bailey and that further confirmed this and she has applied much of his work into her training. She doesn't use corrections because she gets much better results when training without them, no daddy issues.


So she never used corrections?

PS. I have known her for over 15 years.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Who never used corrections?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Susan Garrett. But I know she used to used corrections. But why change to no physical corrections? What was the catalyst?


----------



## Laura Bollschweiler

Christopher Smith said:


> Susan Garrett. But I know she used to used corrections. But why change to no physical corrections? What was the catalyst?


Marketability? 

Laura


----------



## Shade Whitesel

I think SG uses corrections all the time. I would consider Negative Punishment by it's very definition correction. Take the good thing away. Access to good thing, however you want to describe it.


----------



## John Wolf

At this point, it is all semantics. It will all devolve into the 4 quadrant Operant conditioning argument. 

Train your dog. Be as fair as you can. If you make a mistake, learn from it. Use whatever tools you think your dog needs at that time. Adapt and learn. There is no one way to train every dog. Find what works for you and your dog.


----------



## rick smith

Joby...
i'm not surprised at all you don't agree; i'm sure there are a lot others too 

was kinda dumb to use "all inclusives" ... always exceptions of course. some "dangerous" wild animals bond to humans too

btw, any other parts you don't agree with in my generalizations ?

like when we train dogs to seriously aggress humans we are training a behavior that is not "genetic" to the domestic dog ??
..or are we just looking for the exceptions and/or trying to breed it back into them ???

i think we would both agree the type of dog used in serious protection/LE/mwd work should be focused entirely on fighting the human and not equipment, right ?

this has always interested me because, although i've never been around that many pups, i sure couldn't pick out one that would fit in your "exception" category. but if i could and it was there, wouldn't that be the dog we were looking for for serious protection work ?

in fact aggression is a broad term in itself ... what we sometimes call aggression may sometimes just be a display of the basic instinct to hunt/kill for survival
- in most wild animals aggression is mostly seen within the species, or when it is in competition with another predator or the same species but different blood 
- in fact aggression towards humans is often NOT seen in a species that has never been around humans and have not been hunted by them

guess what i'm saying is animal "attacks" involving "biting" are not always aggression ... there needs to be some additional motivation added

why do you think some dogs are born with this aggression towards humans ??
- for thousands if not more years, this type of behavior would not have been tolerated and culled quickly, wouldn't it ? .... and that would tend to remove that behavior from the gene pool of domestic dogs, ?

anyway, feel free to move this since it has nothing to do with crutches and tools


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher Smith said:


> Why do they train without physical correction? Humanity? Religion? Daddy issues?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk



Because she wants to!
Because she can!
Because she's curious to see how well she can do with it!
Because she enjoys doing it. 
Pretty much my reasons for doing it. That doesn't mean I'm any better OR the method is any better. Doesn't mean I'll want to go that far with another dog. I'm just still curious at 66 about dog training and I hope I never stop learning. Old dogs *CAN* learn new tricks!
I'm not a humanitarian by any stretch. I think people should get off their asses and giterdone themselves!
Religious!? Not even close! 
I didn't get along with my dad as a kid....but I know I was a real pia, trouble making, ahole cause it was more fun! No different then lots of kids.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Christopher Smith said:


> Susan Garrett. But I know she used to used corrections. But why change to no physical corrections? What was the catalyst?


Did you not read the first 3 sentences of my post? I clearly said she used to use corrections, that includes physical and verbal. I also clearly said what made her abandon them.

And I remember Trkman saying at one point that her first exposure to training was choke collar training at some obedience club and she hated how she felt giving corrections to her dog and decided to found other ways to train. So for her, the decision was based on not wanting to use corrections. For Susan, her decisions were purely motivated by wanting to get the best results possible. I much prefer Susan's story as I can relate to it more. I try to eliminate corrections from my training not because I feel the slightest bit bad about giving them, but because I think in the end the results can be better. I am no where near eliminating corrections in my training, but I have seen the light at the end of the tunnel so to speak where I have gotten better quality behaviour when I trained it without corrections then when I tried to train the same behaviour with corrections.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten

Maybe for the sake of argument that the definition of a correction as used in this discussion is not referring to with holding a reward but rather adding a punisher, so P+ and P-


And out of all the protection trainers I have seen or watched, the one closest to reminding me of Susan Garret's system of training is Bart Bellon. Yes, he does include corrections, but all of his foundations and majority of the training is very much the sort of systematic, component based, broken down to the point of neurotic, and built by adding value and creating very strong history of reinforcement, very much like what SG does. BB then layers in corrections but if you were to take his foundations a step further you just might be able to create a similar level performance. 

I see majority of people revert to corrections when they have rushed through a positive based foundation and there simply isn't enough value or generalization trained in. That doesn't prove that training without the use of corrections is impossible. But just because some one hasn't achieved it yet, does not make it so. Plenty of people thought going to the moon was impossible, some have tried and failed and proclaimed it must therefore be impossible, but it wasn't, they simply got it wrong.

And again I feel it necessary to add, I am in no way motivated in my opinion on this by any sort of aversion to aversives. I am simply fascinated by the training process involved when those aversives are taken out of the equation.


----------



## John Wolf

Marta Wajngarten said:


> Maybe for the sake of argument that the definition of a correction as used in this discussion is not referring to with holding a reward but rather adding a punisher, so P+ and P-
> 
> 
> And out of all the protection trainers I have seen or watched, the one closest to reminding me of Susan Garret's system of training is Bart Bellon. Yes, he does include corrections, but all of his foundations and majority of the training is very much the sort of systematic, component based, broken down to the point of neurotic, and built by adding value and creating very strong history of reinforcement, very much like what SG does. BB then layers in corrections but if you were to take his foundations a step further you just might be able to create a similar level performance.
> 
> I see majority of people revert to corrections when they have rushed through a positive based foundation and there simply isn't enough value or generalization trained in. That doesn't prove that training without the use of corrections is impossible. But just because some one hasn't achieved it yet, does not make it so. Plenty of people thought going to the moon was impossible, some have tried and failed and proclaimed it must therefore be impossible, but it wasn't, they simply got it wrong.
> 
> And again I feel it necessary to add, I am in no way motivated in my opinion on this by any sort of aversion to aversives. I am simply fascinated by the training process involved when those aversives are taken out of the equation.


I disagree with your description of Bart's system. The foundation is taught with the correction already occurring. From the outset of the training the dog is taught to turn off pressure. It is called NEPOPO (NEGATIVE, positive, positive). His system would not work to the level it does without the dog understanding the urgency of turning off the negative. Just wanted to clear that up.


----------



## Travis Ragin

James Downey said:


> . I mean you said yourselves, alls it takes is a cute little bunny rabbit and all your training unravels.


Few weeks ago A cute little bunny rabbit tried to unravel my control training.(but was unsuccessful)....and it didn't take place on trial field with judges and clipboards.All Unrehearsed 

Here is a vid from one day when my both my collar and leash suddenly & inexplicably snapped loose.There has been an explosion of rabbits and squirrels around here this year.






I want to answer any unasked questions before hand just so the vid is watched in context.You can see that as we approached that cross-walk that my dog was slowing down to wait on me before going in the street and before turning the corner........as I *(the actual leader here)* could have been going in 1 of 3 directions.


Right at about the :18 sec mark....she spotted something moving and immediately went into _*Prey Drive*_(but did not bolt).I was looking through the viewfinder and didn't know what she was watching until walking around the corner.

As we walked on I then began to focus and realize that one those dozens of rabbits had strolled out in the middle of the sidewalk......my dog was still under *Control*,,,,but as we kept going she sped up ahead since I had given NO commands and gave NO inclination that I was going to stop her....while getting closer and closer--she figured I was going to let her go after This One!....but bugs b. lived on to reproduce 20 more of his kinflok




What is special here(for me) in these instances,is that for the first 2 years of it's life I let this dog chase after every squirrel/critter she ever saw---for the free exercise.......heck she even has earned a *Coursing* *Aptitude* title(just to show that it was not Lack of prey drive that kept her under control )......only after throwing my collar in the garbage did the real communication and focus begin.


----------



## susan tuck

I have no clue where James said "all it takes is a cute little bunny and all your training unravels" or to whom he was referring, or in what context, and I'm not going to wade through this thread to find it. I walk my adult dog without a leash and as much as he would like to give chase all over hell and back to the bunnies, coyotes, deer, elk, and other assorted critters up here he stops when I tell him to stop. I trained it with an ecollar, and please believe that regardless of whether or not he is wearing his ecollar he listens, that's just the particular method/tool I used.

I also don't know who James was referring to when he said "The correction clan, states a properly applied correction done fairly should not induce stress" because nobody I know thinks a correction shouldn't induce stress on some level, that's what a correction does. 

I wish James would come back and respond to some of the still unanswered questions some of us have posed on this thread.


----------



## Joby Becker

susan tuck said:


> I have no clue where James said "all it takes is a cute little bunny and all your training unravels" or to whom he was referring, or in what context, and I'm not going to wade through this thread to find it. I walk my adult dog without a leash and as much as he would like to give chase all over hell and back to the bunnies, coyotes, deer, elk, and other assorted critters up here he stops when I tell him to stop. I trained it with an ecollar, and please believe that regardless of whether or not he is wearing his ecollar he listens, that's just the particular method/tool I used.
> 
> I also don't know who James was referring to when he said "The correction clan, states a properly applied correction done fairly should not induce stress" because nobody I know thinks a correction shouldn't induce stress on some level, that's what a correction does.
> 
> I wish James would come back and respond to some of the still unanswered questions some of us have posed on this thread.


From reading the posts, it appears he wants to train stress free, as well as correction free. but withholding rewards creates stress too.

regardless of all that, he called out the ENRTIRE PP crowd, stating that they cannot control their dogs.


----------



## James Downey

Joby Becker said:


> From reading the posts, it appears he wants to train stress free, as well as correction free. but withholding rewards creates stress too.
> 
> regardless of all that, he called out the ENRTIRE PP crowd, stating that they cannot control their dogs.


HUH? PP= purley positive. 

I do not want to train stress free, I do not want to train correction free. But nice try shit stirrer. 

And susan with overwhelming demand for questions on training. I thought I best stop giving away what I should be selling!!!!:-D


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> he shows submission, and I never once had to kick his ass to get it. I like this cause I believe that he has learned through cooperative interaction it's just simply in his best interests to listen to me. He is submissive by choice, not by force. He willingly and for the greater good takes the omega role. It's much more pure. It's a by-product of the training, not the reason for the training. This also has taught me that dominace and submission are the result in how we interact with our dogs, not some genetic trait to base a training protocol around. I believe if you have a dominate dog, that's the relationship that was created. when we get our dogs, thier is no relationship...it's a blank piece of paper, what we draw on it, is what we draw on it.
> ~James Downey


James, I always enjoy your posts, they're so clear and congruent with my way of understanding things. But here, I have to say there's a bit more than the relationship that develops at issue here, because not all dogs seem to be able to develop the same unquestioning willingness toward me that I would prefer from them. I have and immensely enjoy the leadership role I have taken with one of my particular dogs, but I've not been able to fully duplicate that among several of his offspring. Each one of them has required more corrections in their 10 month lifetime than he has in nearly five years! I'm attributing this to their mother's side then, as she likes to test me in what she can get away with quite often, although not in any sort of leadership challenging manner. Her progeny are showing the same sort of behavior, their world doesn't revolve around pleasing me. Though I treat every individual accordingly (and therefore slightly different), my approach is fairly consistent (I think), and so I think genetics really ARE a prevailing factor for the full extent of my ideal type of relationship to be formed.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

To sum that up, I think bidable temperament is largely genetic, and not just learned in a developing relationship.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Daryl Ehret said:


> To sum that up, I think bidable temperament is largely genetic, and not just learned in a developing relationship.


Biddable might be genetic but there is a lot that you can do with what James is referencing to bring the independent thinkers to biddable. With the genetically biddable you don't have to work at it. 

T


----------



## Daryl Ehret

As I said, the prevailing factor, not the only one. But, after 18 pages, I don't recall mention of any one of the "lot you can do" options to avoid resorting to "crutches".


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Daryl Ehret said:


> As I said, the prevailing factor, not the only one. But, after 18 pages, I don't recall mention of any one of the "lot you can do" options to avoid resorting to "crutches".


That's because it turned into anti-purely positive. One you really embrace controlling access to the resources and all good things come through the handler, its amazing how biddable an independent type becomes. 

T


----------



## Hans Akerbakk

I threw my collars away . I'm ready to start training by using my psychic powers and positive thoughts technique, real cutting edge stuff hard to explain you guys would not understand.
Then Joby says that it appears James wants to train with no stress or corrections , I want to train this way!
Now James tells us he wants to train with stress and use corrections ?
So James and I are dumpster diving looking for old tools and crutches, prongs ,e-collars, so we can train in stress and use corrections, I really felt like we bonded.
With my advanced psychic powers I never saw this coming.
James, please explain what are we doing bro ?


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> That's because it turned into anti-purely positive. One you really embrace controlling access to the resources and all good things come through the handler, its amazing how biddable an independent type becomes.
> 
> T


You're generalizing, and I get nothing useful out of that.


----------



## brad robert

Daryl Ehret said:


> To sum that up, I think bidable temperament is largely genetic, and not just learned in a developing relationship.


Biddable seems to be genetic but it comes in so many forms i mean some are biddable but love other people so much it drives them to distraction and others are biddable but might be D.A so what im trying to get to is at the end of the day we train and turn them into biddable monsters waiting our every command by training and nurturing and controlling resources and biddability is something breeders should strive for but i think with so many factors apart from the perfect dog who only cares about YOU it really come down to us and how good we are


----------



## Daryl Ehret

_ i think with so many factors apart from the perfect dog who only cares about YOU it really come down to us and how good we are _

Yes, but that's not always true either. I have what I consider a very biddable dog named Rocky, but boy when he gets on a cat fixation, I can forget it. He's suddenly deaf, has tunnel vision, and completely oblivious to hard correction. My leadership with him falls apart.


----------



## James Downey

Hans Akerbakk said:


> I threw my collars away . I'm ready to start training by using my psychic powers and positive thoughts technique, real cutting edge stuff hard to explain you guys would not understand.
> Then Joby says that it appears James wants to train with no stress or corrections , I want to train this way!
> Now James tells us he wants to train with stress and use corrections ?
> So James and I are dumpster diving looking for old tools and crutches, prongs ,e-collars, so we can train in stress and use corrections, I really felt like we bonded.
> With my advanced psychic powers I never saw this coming.
> James, please explain what are we doing bro ?


Hans, I cannot have a conversation with you over a computer....Your reading comprehension skills....they are not that great.


----------



## Hans Akerbakk

Okay sarcasm went over your head.
The thread is about tools vs crutches.
The only tool I see right now is you James, the crutch could be your system.
Why not answer the questions .
Your answers could give you some merit, but all I see is you dodging questions and taking pop shots at the people who ask.
It's your thread and you haven't added anything of substance.
Why is it hard to find a decoy to do the work you want ?
I'm a decoy I do what ever the handler wants, it's thier dog I'm only a tool but I'll give my input.
To me a tool is any device used to communicate with a dog to achieve a desired behavior, positive or negative.
to me a crutch would be using the same tool the same way with every dog with no consideration of temperment.


----------



## Guest

I'm a decoy I do what ever the handler wants, it's thier dog I'm only a tool but I'll give my input.
To me a tool is any device used to communicate with a dog to achieve a desired behavior, positive or negative. to me a crutch would be using the same tool the same way with every dog with no consideration of temperment.[/QUOTE]

I like this common sense approach instead of taking one side of the fence or method


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Hans there would be a transfer of cash from my pocket to someone like you if i could find one.


----------



## mike finn

James Downey said:


> Hans, I cannot have a conversation with you over a computer....Your reading comprehension skills....they are not that great.


James maybe you could copy and paste the PM you sent me. I think it really explained this thing very well and can clear up some misconceptions that some of people have about what your saying.


----------



## James Downey

mike finn said:


> James maybe you could copy and paste the PM you sent me. I think it really explained this thing very well and can clear up some misconceptions that some of people have about what your saying.


 
Good Advice Mike, But I do not post for the same reason I did not initially respond to your questions.


----------



## James Downey

Hans Akerbakk said:


> Okay sarcasm went over your head.
> The thread is about tools vs crutches.
> The only tool I see right now is you James, the crutch could be your system.
> Why not answer the questions .
> Your answers could give you some merit, but all I see is you dodging questions and taking pop shots at the people who ask.
> It's your thread and you haven't added anything of substance.
> Why is it hard to find a decoy to do the work you want ?
> I'm a decoy I do what ever the handler wants, it's thier dog I'm only a tool but I'll give my input.
> To me a tool is any device used to communicate with a dog to achieve a desired behavior, positive or negative.
> to me a crutch would be using the same tool the same way with every dog with no consideration of temperment.


I answered Mike and Aerial.... Because thier motives were to come to some understanding. They were genuinley interested in hearing my experience. They may not even had agreed with me, but they were dog trainers about it. They were interested in my experiments and my conclusions. 

This is why I have not answered anyone else. First, They stated what they "think" about training the way I do. I give a shit about what they think. Who cares what they think. What they do think, is not based in any type of experimentation with the training. So they have no frame of reference, everything they think about it is conjured up in thier mind, or at best second hand information from what they thing they see....which is a snippet in someone elses training . They have zero first hand experience. But me. I have experimented with collars, e-collars, dominace models, marker, placement.....blah, blah, blag So, I know both sides. So why would I even argue with that person. They cannot provide anytype of actual findings. But here's an interesting fact. everyone on here who has tried it....has had good results, or at best said it furtherd them as a trainer. So that's why I do not want to converse with people whom have not given it shot, and by a shot mean. They have at least set a goal, and tried to achieve it. or had a hypothesis, and tried to experiement and come to some conclusion about it. And my experience when people talk about what they "think" it's always rooted in someother motivation, generally something ethical, emotional or egotistical.....it's screws with some inner belief they have. And I was not immune to it either, I had to be shown some evidence of the training before I bought in.


And Hans, did not say I couldn't find a decoy who train the way I wanted.... I said decoys are hard to come by in my parts. 


And here's my definiton of a crutch. I use them at times....I do. for when I admit that I cannot successfuly control the access to the reward. 

But here is what I see. I see people not being able to control the dog, so they place a collar on the dog....hoping it will provide some level of control. But it really does not, it simply mananges the dog, when the dog is unmanageable....given enough time or sufficient motivation. The crutch will fail. The biggest evidence that the tool has become a crutch is a trial wise dog, or a dog that is wise to the tool. Now the tool has become something else. It's a kick stand...so to speak, holding everything up. The dog is obedient to the tool, not the handler. Some people have sufficently "tricked" the dog to not be wise to the tool....But still, if the dog ever finds out the truth....The training falls apart. The dog has more of relationship with the tool than they do the handler. In my experience, if the only thing that gives the trainer power over the dog is a collar, the trainer really is poweless over the dog.


----------



## susan tuck

WOW!!! You're a real piece of work, aren't you?

Sorry I wasted your time with a legitimate question about your methods, specifically about tracking, guess I thought you were actually serious, but no worries it sure as hell won't happen again. 
:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Susan,

I'm not sure about crutch but we sure the fuk have a good idea what a "tool" is !


----------



## brad robert

Daryl Ehret said:


> _ i think with so many factors apart from the perfect dog who only cares about YOU it really come down to us and how good we are _
> 
> Yes, but that's not always true either. I have what I consider a very biddable dog named Rocky, but boy when he gets on a cat fixation, I can forget it. He's suddenly deaf, has tunnel vision, and completely oblivious to hard correction. My leadership with him falls apart.


Yes been there myself,maybe it is really leadership at fault but in a real pack can a pack leader stop another dog killing say a rabbit and how would he do that \\/.


James how do u stop your dog killing a cat with out a correction and im not being a smart ass just want to know???


----------



## Joby Becker

I thought I asked some legitimate questions..


----------



## James Downey

susan tuck said:


> James: Your approach is interesting. I am wondering with regards to tracking, how do you teach the dog to pull into the track, not hectic, but track in drive? How about articles, how did you teach article indication?


 
Sorry Susan, I did not see the tracking question. Also, I am avoiding some of the questions that are more in the " I am looking to prove you wrong ".tone. I am not going to argue about it. I have formed my conclusions,....which btw is the ever going evolution of training. I will change them as I experiment more. I know my orginal post was a bit of poking the bear.... but People are not required to take what I saw personally. 

I am not sure what you mean "pull into the track"? Do you mean pull on the leash or get on the track and not deviate? If you mean not deviate. I have not had a problem with the dog abandoing checking off the track for food. I think dogs that do, And this is just from my experience, do not really understand where the food will be. I think this is caused by scent pads.....I think scent pads make problems. First, a pad puts a lot of scent out there, much larger than the pad itself. So the dogs associate the scent with food but also the dog never learns where the pad ends. Also, Bart Bellon said sometihng in an interview that made me think about scent pads....he said trainers reward behaviors they do not want all the time. So, I do not want to reinforce the behavior or the idea that thier maybe food or scent maybe to the side. I am no so sure this is true....But I do not not see the benefit to a box as opposed to just starting the dog off on heel to toe footsteps. 

I want the dog to find the next foot step. Circles do a good job of this. if a dog can simply find the heel of the next footstep they will never lose the track. As for in drive, I notice the dogs start off quite confused and a bit hectic. But to find the small food they have to calm down. They also learn it's better to be more calm to find the next footstep, than to run around like a crazy dog. Dogs are good at finding the most efficient way to the resource. as for drive, I am not looking for a dog that is pulling down the track or super excited. I am looking for super focused, methodical drive....I think a better term is concertration. I am looking for super concentration. 

Now some mistakes I have seen trainers make, and I have seen in it 2 dogs. Is for some reason, with circles, the dogs blow over all the food the first time around. not eating at all, then eating the second go around. I think this is caused by people not paying attention to the details, Especially food size, or if it falls into the grass. The dog has some experiences finding "easy" food. So it's no longer searching the crushed grass for hiddn morsels. It's smelling the crushed grass as "help" to find the easy pieces. Think about like this. If I put money on a trail in the woods, and just laid it on top of the trail. you would follow the trail looking for money. You could run down it, and not miss a dollar. But if I went to a field with knee high grass.....stomped down a trail, and hid the money under the grass.....you would have to be highly concentrated to find the money, you'd have to go slow, look hard. I think the placement of the food is really important. I also think that a good tracking dog is built on a handler that pays attention to the details.

Also, for what it's worth. I train in spurts. Like I track for a week straight, then No tracking for a week. 9 days on 10 days off. but when I decide to track, I make sure I can do it for at least 3 or 4 days in a row. I think tracking one day, and then not doing it for a few days, I think you actually cause problems with this. The first track out, I call the problem track, This is where I introduce the new challenge. Like change of terrian. I am not critical of the dog if they do not know what to do on this track. The whole point of this track is to simply intoduce them to a new challenge. Not to "test" them and see if they can do it. If they can do it...great. And if they can't....great. Because Now I know, this is what I need to teach the dog. So in this cycle of tracking "days". I focus on change of terrian. I know the cycle of tracking days should be concluded once I see some improvement in the dogs ability. then we stop tracking for a few days. I focus on this problem, till I feel the dog now has the experience to deal with this problem with miinimal effort. Then on to the next "problem" track.....as the dog progresses and gets many cycles and has solved many tracking challenges. I can start to make tracks where that include multiple past challenges. Again, though the progression is the same, The first track is just an introduction to the challenges. Also, I may even use the same track day after day to teach. Especailly if the dog has an incredibly diffcult time with it. I will just keep running it.....Like a level on a video game. If I get stuck on one level. I just keep playing it over and over.....I eventually learn what it takes to beat the level. 

And articles, I teach at home. I take an article, and throw it. on the ground, the dog naturally will invesstigate. I marker train this. then, when they start touching and looking at me, waiting for a mark. I ask for a down, then mark and reward. I do this at home till it's perfect. I also play games. I throw them behind the couch and have the go look for em, under the bed. 

Then when this is perfect, And I can give no command and they down on them. I put em' on the circle track. I may put a some more food around them so they stop to eat, to give me a chance to down them. But I fade this quickly. I then pick up my article and put in the foot step behind me. So the dog has another chance to practise next time around. Then, I start to proof them, by building duration. once duration is built, I let them see me put food in the foot steps in front of them but make the wait. This is an area I will use a "crutch" because I cannot keep them from breaking without the leash sometimes when teaching. So I will let them struggle and pull and not say a word. they will explore different behaviors (by this time my dogs generally know that if something is not working, try something else) they will eventually down, then I may allow them to have access to it.


----------



## James Downey

brad robert said:


> Yes been there myself,maybe it is really leadership at fault but in a real pack can a pack leader stop another dog killing say a rabbit and how would he do that \\/.
> 
> 
> James how do u stop your dog killing a cat with out a correction and im not being a smart ass just want to know???


Brad and Daryl. I am cautious to not speak in absolutes (and I probably have, I am sure someone will point it out). 

I am not sure about all this Pack leader stuff either. As I see it, the relationship on the grander scale, or if you will, The Social structures that exist between man and dog vs. dog and dog are quite different. They are different cultures. Dogs, seem to be the only animal that out of thier own will and interest chose to be with us. Dogs have relationships with other dogs based on that they are the same species.....They need each other for procreation. They have relationships with us, because it immensly useful for them to gain access to food and shelter. From what I have experienced with my own dogs, I am not sure I can equate my posititon to the same as some alphla dog. It's different. So, I think basing training protocols based on how dogs relate to one another is not such a good idea. Dogs know (at least, what I consider a mentally intune dog) that we cannot procreate with them. My females do not shove thier ass in my face when they are ripe. And my boys do not hump my wife when she is fertile either, I know some males do, but I think this is some social problem in the dog. So by even this differeence, dogs see us differently. Here's a good example. A lot of puppy buyers from me are reluctant to teach the dog at a young age that food comes from them, and is not guarnteed. Soon the dog takes the owners for granted, and has some sort sense of entitlement to the food. Or the dog starts demanding different food....either way. I teach my pups at a young age. I have the food, I control it, and it's not always a guarntee. I tend to get dogs whom on one level are a bit more biddable for their food. I do this with toys. 

So that leads me to biddablitly. I get that dogs some comply easier than others. But I still do not believe that a dog who believe his owner will refuse to allow him access to the things he wants with conviciton and consistency will continue to exhibit behavior that show they are unwilling to cooperate. I am sure some dogs get this faster than others. But, a dog that believes his handler possess everything he wants, and the handler has shown the dog without fail, that if you do not listen to me....I will deny you access. I am absolutley positive a dog will not starve himself to death just in an effort to be stubborn. 

As for killing a cat. I would use discpline. Somehow people got the idea I am not using any type of punishment by this thread. Life is not without discpline.

To sum this all up.... And why I feel so strongly about this, is because I think I have tapped into something. Something, that has gotten me on fire about dog training, something different, Something beyond what I see most people doing. It's a work in progress, and I hope to have some success with it one because I would love to share it with the world. And it's not purley positive, or anti-punishment....actually I believe setting boundries with your dogs is a very important part of it. But here's what I have found. That I have had to discpline myself to behave a certain way, to control my impulses. I see most people trying to discpline the dog to behave a certain way and control the dog's impulses. When I was using corrections via a collar. I could give a dog correction, not have any regret about it, not think about at all after training. I would mechanically go about trying to time the correction well, make sure it was hard enough to change the behavior but soft enough to not cause panic or real damage, I would never be sure if it would stick or how long it's effects would be. And this is evident in a lot a trainers...you see 8 year old dogs still wearing collars.... Getting corrected for the same mistakes they made when they were 3. It takes a lot more discpline for me to not feed a puppy because they did not wanna track, or they wanted to eat something tastier, or if they are not performing in OB to simply put them away without a reward. Or if they do not want to come to leave them in a field all by themselves. Do I worry about when I walk away? hell yeah, I do. I worry, what if they don't come? what if they wander the other way? what if they run into trouble? But I quiet that, Because I use to give into those feelings, and I ended up with an e-collar on my dog, because the ****er knew I was a puss and would not leave him. Now, I leave....still have the same anxiety....But I also know. That if I just stick to my guns and leave. I will only have to do this once or twice in the dogs life, and he will know that when I say come. It does not mean, come here. It means I am leaving. And so far this has been more powerful than any rabbit, goose shit, mud puddles, even in the middle of intense play with other dogs. I say come my dogs come. I am not going to argue about if anyone believes me or not. You don't like it, You don't have to do it. Click another thread. I am not selling anyone anything. It's your's if you want it, and if you don't just the same.


----------



## James Downey

And just to give credit to some of the people whom I have been taught a lot of this stuff .... I did not make it all up on my own. The funny thing is we do not train together anymore but chat on the phone a few times a week....we are almost 2300 miles apart, I have never seen his new dogs, and he has not seen mine since he was 8 weeks old. And It's amazing, he will tell me the evolution of his training and the results he's getting. And I swear that's as if he is telling me, the evolution of my training and the results that I am getting.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Isnt this just plain old NILIF??


----------



## James Downey

Joby Becker said:


> Are you saying you do not use any leashes or lines in bitework either? Or just the OB?
> 
> If so, can you explain a little bit how you go about teaching proper targeting, countering and grip building, or drive building? You never backtied the dog or use any type of leash or collar for backpressure, or to hold the dog back at all?
> 
> *How would you go about training exercises where the dog is able to self reward itself, such as call-offs and object guards with decoy in a bite suit, (where the decoy cannot "hide" the reward from the dog) without the use of a leash and collar or some other tool?*


 
Joby, I have used a leash in only the Bark and hold thus far in protection training. It seems for whatever reason, if the dog was dirty and all I did was say no, and/or make him start over, he would more explosive bigger extinction bursts when I would say with extreme fustration, take a bite. So I used a leash to prevent him taking a bite on entry and just held him there till he settled....I view this as a crutch. Because without it everything falls apart. I tried a systematic approach of teaching barking in front of me at first and back chaining it, but I was unsuccessful. 

I will start with Drive building, becasue it seems to be where most people start. I don't build drive. I think I teach the dog what toys are fun. But, Whether or not play these games when the dog is young....the drive will be there when they are older. I don't believe you can install drive in a dog. I think you can awaken drive that was suppressed....But I think as trainers sometimes we take credit for genetics. 

I feel the same with grips. Both my dogs have had good grips. I have yet to see someone successfully make a dog that genetically does not bite full...bite full...or stop chewing or whatever. Again, maybe you can untie shitty training. But, I think grips are genetic trait. And I know not everyone believe this, but I believe the importance of full grip is a indicator of confidence. Most nervous biting dogs are the hardest biting dogs, but with a 3/4 grip. 

Countering, I teach informally on a rag. I do not go to anything else till the dog knows this on a leather rag. 


As for your last question. That's a good one. Because here's the kicker. With my newest dog, I have seen him do 2 types of self rewarding. 1. the extinction burst kind out of fustration. This is still a puzzle for me. So, I have no answer for this yet. as I said earlier, I would use a leash for this....but I will keep at it. 2. There is the mistake bite by the dog. Generally if I can tell this is mistake because of how he takes the grip. Again, it's not this extremely forceful explosion in combination with some sort of cue that he is going to lose something. Its simply a mistake. generally I can tell the dog no for these, and he will not repeat the mistake. It's almost like when I say no, the bite is not rewarding for him.....

You have got me thinking on that last question on why there are 2 different types of bites. I assume the first one, the extinction burst bite is good information that I have not commuincated very well what I want....and the dog is just getting fustrated on how to gain access. 

But biting after all is just another behavior. So when I say no, on the mistake bite, I am just marking a behavior I do not want. The dog trusts I am fair and will guide him on how to gain access, and this trust is based on prior experiences the dog has had with me. 

Now, my first dog did self reward quite often, had problems outing...even when I said no she would just keep doing what she was doing. I think context of sport work my relationship with the dog was not as good. she was obedient to the collars though. the exchanges we had were not as fair as with my next dog. Seeing my new dog is more dog, I am quite suprised I have gotten the results I have in terms of biting. At first I thought he was going to be an even bigger challenge. 

But this is where I started to get excited. because I seem to be able to communicate with this dog much, much better. I was talking with a friend the other day, and he said that he has problems helping people train, (and he taught me how to train) Whom do not have good relationships with thier dogs. because the tools he uses (similar to mine) are based on how he relates to the dog....If they cannot communicate with thier dog like he can with his....he has no tools to help them.


----------



## Hans Akerbakk

Jody and Peter,
Thanks for the kind words, Itrain dogs because I enjoy it.
I have never accepted money, a few bottles have been given to me.
Married for over 20 yrs so I have no ego left when it comes to training I only see the dog.
Joby I like your dog lol , I want to send her a phone book .
James thanks for adding something to your thread.
I was hoping you would explain how you do protection, not to criticize ,just for something to think about.


----------



## James Downey

Peter Cavallaro said:


> Isnt this just plain old NILIF??


 
No becasue somethings in my dogs lives are free. There are times when I allow do them just to play ball or sit down and share my lunch with them, or allow them free roam. 

At first in the dog's life. The boundries are pretty tight.....just like a kid, but as they mature, and can handle more. They are allowed more.

I think this is just parenting thing though. Some people allow the dog to have the keys to the car and the house on day one. Some people, it's boot camp for the whole dogs life.


----------



## brad robert

James Downey said:


> Brad and Daryl. I am cautious to not speak in absolutes (and I probably have, I am sure someone will point it out).
> 
> I am not sure about all this Pack leader stuff either. As I see it, the relationship on the grander scale, or if you will, The Social structures that exist between man and dog vs. dog and dog are quite different. They are different cultures. Dogs, seem to be the only animal that out of thier own will and interest chose to be with us. Dogs have relationships with other dogs based on that they are the same species.....They need each other for procreation. They have relationships with us, because it immensly useful for them to gain access to food and shelter. From what I have experienced with my own dogs, I am not sure I can equate my posititon to the same as some alphla dog. It's different. So, I think basing training protocols based on how dogs relate to one another is not such a good idea. Dogs know (at least, what I consider a mentally intune dog) that we cannot procreate with them. My females do not shove thier ass in my face when they are ripe. And my boys do not hump my wife when she is fertile either, I know some males do, but I think this is some social problem in the dog. So by even this differeence, dogs see us differently. Here's a good example. A lot of puppy buyers from me are reluctant to teach the dog at a young age that food comes from them, and is not guarnteed. Soon the dog takes the owners for granted, and has some sort sense of entitlement to the food. Or the dog starts demanding different food....either way. I teach my pups at a young age. I have the food, I control it, and it's not always a guarntee. I tend to get dogs whom on one level are a bit more biddable for their food. I do this with toys.
> 
> So that leads me to biddablitly. I get that dogs some comply easier than others. But I still do not believe that a dog who believe his owner will refuse to allow him access to the things he wants with conviciton and consistency will continue to exhibit behavior that show they are unwilling to cooperate. I am sure some dogs get this faster than others. But, a dog that believes his handler possess everything he wants, and the handler has shown the dog without fail, that if you do not listen to me....I will deny you access. I am absolutley positive a dog will not starve himself to death just in an effort to be stubborn.
> 
> As for killing a cat. I would use discpline. Somehow people got the idea I am not using any type of punishment by this thread. Life is not without discpline.
> 
> To sum this all up.... And why I feel so strongly about this, is because I think I have tapped into something. Something, that has gotten me on fire about dog training, something different, Something beyond what I see most people doing. It's a work in progress, and I hope to have some success with it one because I would love to share it with the world. And it's not purley positive, or anti-punishment....actually I believe setting boundries with your dogs is a very important part of it. But here's what I have found. That I have had to discpline myself to behave a certain way, to control my impulses. I see most people trying to discpline the dog to behave a certain way and control the dog's impulses. When I was using corrections via a collar. I could give a dog correction, not have any regret about it, not think about at all after training. I would mechanically go about trying to time the correction well, make sure it was hard enough to change the behavior but soft enough to not cause panic or real damage, I would never be sure if it would stick or how long it's effects would be. And this is evident in a lot a trainers...you see 8 year old dogs still wearing collars.... Getting corrected for the same mistakes they made when they were 3. It takes a lot more discpline for me to not feed a puppy because they did not wanna track, or they wanted to eat something tastier, or if they are not performing in OB to simply put them away without a reward. Or if they do not want to come to leave them in a field all by themselves. Do I worry about when I walk away? hell yeah, I do. I worry, what if they don't come? what if they wander the other way? what if they run into trouble? But I quiet that, Because I use to give into those feelings, and I ended up with an e-collar on my dog, because the ****er knew I was a puss and would not leave him. Now, I leave....still have the same anxiety....But I also know. That if I just stick to my guns and leave. I will only have to do this once or twice in the dogs life, and he will know that when I say come. It does not mean, come here. It means I am leaving. And so far this has been more powerful than any rabbit, goose shit, mud puddles, even in the middle of intense play with other dogs. I say come my dogs come. I am not going to argue about if anyone believes me or not. You don't like it, You don't have to do it. Click another thread. I am not selling anyone anything. It's your's if you want it, and if you don't just the same.


Thanks James!!:grin:

I raise my pups the same way and they are very biddable and no way in hell will they starve themselves i just end up with pups doing amazing things and my new pup has learnt dumbell hold in a week or two all food based.

Recently saw a dog that had free rein on food etc and owners were looking for answers on his unruly behaviour and basically giving them the finger all the time,funny thing was the dog had extreme food drive and was a dog just waiting to be tapped into they just didnt know how.


----------



## brad robert

James Downey said:


> No becasue somethings in my dogs lives are free. There are times when I allow do them just to play ball or sit down and share my lunch with them, or allow them free roam.
> 
> At first in the dog's life. The boundries are pretty tight.....just like a kid, but as they mature, and can handle more. They are allowed more.
> 
> I think this is just parenting thing though. Some people allow the dog to have the keys to the car and the house on day one. Some people, it's boot camp for the whole dogs life.


There is MUCH to be said for that yes a tight beginning really starts the right path and gets them thinking right and knowing that its up to them to make the right choices to get what they want and that they have power to make things happen well thats how i see it anyway:-k and i have been able to ease up as they get older.


----------



## Bart Karmich

Originally Posted by *Terrasita Cuffie*  
_I don't train in biting. Never had to, Trained to stop the bite._


That's like saying, "I don't need to teach him math, because he's good with numbers."


----------

