Paul&Muttley wrote:I am still trying to understand the principles of positive only training as compared to what I consider a more balanced approach of having immediate consequences for behaviors.
Positive training does have immediate consequences if it is done properly but mainly it is setting the dog up to succeed and not fail. If my dog is outside and I call her in, she doesn't come, I walk in and close the door, the dog is ignored and left on her own. Very few dogs won't come racing to the door when you do this, dogs don't like being ignored like this. I open the door and as she starts to walk in I give the command, she has then done as I asked so is rewarded. Next time I call her in from outside she comes right away. This has worked with every dog I have had, all are rescues and most came with problems caused by abuse of some sort.
The consequences of her ignoring my command to come in was she was ignored which she didn't like.
The reward was when she came into the house. She has learnt that when I call I expect her in straight away without being poked or other method that will cause pain even if it is instant.
I don't consider a quick physical block or "poke" as being abusive or capable of causing lasting physical or emotional trauma.
Nobody has suggested that blocking is abusive, blocking is standing in front of a dog to stop him going forward, no pain involved. Poking hurts and can hurt a lot, if it hurts it is abuse. If someone poked you what would your reaction be?
A dog, or a person, usually interacts with the environment by offering behaviors, and then learning from the consequences, which may be good or bad. One may hope that all behaviors offered are "good", but that metric is defined by society and the situation. I would rather have a dog who is not totally dependent on me to control and direct his behavior, and instead feels free to offer some behaviors on his own. That might be vital in a situation where I might not be present, or able to provide guidance.
I think you have the wrong idea of positive training Paul, all my dogs develop independence, one of the reasons I don't do obedience is I like my dogs independent and not like a machine. I have a lot of fun with the way my dogs behave and interact because they are not frightened to interact with each other or humans. My dogs are all free to ask for a cuddle and know they won't be pushed away no matter how busy I am. If I am busy they just get a tickle, a smile and kind word before I carry on doing what I was, my dogs are happy with this but if I am not busy, they get the full works, again they are happy.
Several of my dogs have been abused and came with all the usual problems, the would race to the furthest corner if anyone spoke in a loud voice, raised a hand etc, now they are confident dogs that know they are safe and nothing nasty will happen to them. They are free to express themselves in any way they want.
I don't see where a simple "poke", or hand block, along with a quick "Tsst" to mark the undesired behavior, is any more cruel or abusive as blocking the dog with ones body or withdrawing attention. It seems as reasonable and effective to provide a quick "correction" to stop a behavior, as touching a hot stove is a good deterrent to repeating the behavior. Of course, if it scares you so much that you fear the stove and never learn to cook, that is a neurotic overreaction that needs to be dealt with.
Blocking a dog with your body doesn't hurt your dog, poking them does. Anyone can learn by fear which poking does. We are not dogs, we don't think like dogs but like us dogs feel pain. How would you feel if your teacher poked you ever time you didn't do what you should have done? You would have still learnt but not as willingly and been resentful of your teacher. You wouldn't have the same inclination to do what your teacher wanted you to either which would make school a lot more difficult for you.
In the natural world in which dogs evolved, there are always both positive and negative consequences to any action. One may learn by means of training to do "good" things and not do "bad" things, and sometimes the consequences of a "bad" behavior may be so extreme that a lesser aversive correction may be much preferred to the more dangerous consequence of something that is done without knowledge of what will happen.
For instance, a shock collar is often dismissed arbitrarily as being obviously cruel and inhumane. Yet the actual stimulus is not so much painful as it is surprising, and even at higher levels it does not do any lasting physical damage.
Having seen the result of a dog that continually had a shock collar used on the high levels it does do a lot of mental harm to a dog. This was a GSD, beautiful dog, he was eventually given to the army because he became aggressive out of fear of the collar and put one of the senior dog trainers in hospital, they had to dart this dog to calm him down then pts him so don't tell me that shock collars don't do any harm, this was a lovely, 1 year old dog when I first saw him.
I saw an example of appropriate use for teaching a dog to avoid a rattlesnake. One dog who did not understand the danger poked his nose into some bushes and ignored the rattler's warnings, and attacked, killing the snake but getting multiple bites that eventually proved fatal. Some dogs naturally and instinctively avoid snakes. Perhaps a dog could be exposed to snakes and clicker trained to avoid them. But a few quick applications of a shock collar when a dog showed too much interest in a snake can very quickly condition the dog to avoid any contact, and even alert his owner to the presence of a snake.
Dogs were trained to ignore rattle snakes before shock collars were invented, if it could be done then it can be done now. Clicker training wasn't know then either.
A well known shock collar trainer was in a discussion when I said it had taken me 4 years to find the key to Joe coming back to be because he had been beaten, he told me that with a shock collar I could have had a 95% recall within 14 days. He shut up when I told him with a clicker it took me 10 days to get a 99% recall from Joe once I discovered clickers.
Certainly, physical punishment and excessive forceful corrections have been way overdone in dog training, as I will attest in my own unsuccessful training classes with Muttley at the hands of a so-called professional trainer. And I am convinced that positive methods are almost always the best. But I think there are times when a more direct negative feedback may be more effective than trying to avoid what seems obvious in stopping unwanted behavior. Particularly, I think the advice to the person whose dog continued to bite her in the butt when she turned around was "over the top". Telling someone to wear three pair of pants and thick sweaters so her biting dog would not cause damage and pain seems ridiculous.
Now THAT says it all!
I used to have a Whippet/Labrador that had taught herself to go for walks because her previous owner didn't take her, she also taught herself to catch and kill rabbits, squirrels, pheasants, voles etc and was the perfect killing machine she was so quick the animal was dead as soon as she bit it in the neck, she always killed by biting the neck. She was a dog that had learnt to hunt without any control. It wasn't easy and it took time and patience but I did get her so she was 100% being recalled once she started the chase. In those days I knew a lot less about dog training than I do now, I had never heard of a clicker or a shock collar, I refused to put a choke chain on because I didn't like them yet I was able to train her to this standard without the use of any aversions.
If I can do it so can everyone else. Not only do I have well trained dogs but I also have a very strong bond with my dogs, people who use aversions, even small ones, don't have the bonding I have and neither do you. You will never get the strong bond I have while you use aversions. None of my dogs are trained to attack or protect but I know that they will because they have. An army trainer once told me that the difference in using positive methods or aversions with dogs is if you use positive methods they dog will protect you by putting his life for yours, use averisions like shock collars and the dog will look after himself first and leave you to face the concequences. This trainer was very experienced and dogs he trained were abroad with our army doing a good job.
It takes time and patience to build up a strong bond and trust with your dog, that can disappear in seconds if you hurt him/her.
[url=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/PIXIE.jpg][img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/Nethertumbleweed/th_PIXIE.jpg[/img][/url]
where a year or two ago they echoed with dog-whistles. TV programmes make everyone an instant trainer - and these helpful people do not hesitate to try this marvellous method that they have been warned not to try at the beginning of the programme. Heyho, that's people.
Heaven help anyone who tried to poke my dog. Or me.
