Bacca bit me!!!!!

[BarbV]

How about we talk about what works for certain behaviours and what doesn't work. When to use positive reinforcement vs. more dominant training.

So today I was home with my dogs. Indy started barking like a fool at the patio door because he could see a dog walking by. He went nuts.

I got up and did "Caesar's touch"....though I actually never touched him. Didn't have to. Indy immediately stopped barking and went into a sit.

I released him from the sit and invited him to come for a treat. Only then did I let him outside. He immediately charged out barking. I stood at the door (confidant) and did the same "tcchh" sound as I would if I could touch him if he was close by. He relaxed immediately and came back. He got another treat.

So I think you can combine both positive and assertive training techniques to get results.

This is a work in progress for me. But after two years, I'm finally starting to see results.

 

[Alissa]

I am sorry to hear that. if a dog bites you, it is my opinion that he/she doesn't respect you as an alpha. A subordinate NEVER bites the alpha. This is grounds for a serious fight. That being said, it is time to re-establish your dominance.

I have four shelties, they see me as an alpha to the point that they never run off, I don't need to leash them, they always look for my command, and they're genuinely fantastic dogs, and very happy as a result.

People tend to equate not dominant with unhappiness in canines, but humanizing dogs is typically what causes this dominant type of behavior to begin with, and is counterproductive.

A dog is truly happy when it knows it's place in your pack, which is below any and all humans.

Some disagree with hitting your dog. I disagree with physical abuse. Smacking your dog on the bottom after it initially bites you is not abuse, it is correcting a bad behavior. Your dog needs to understand who is boss. Dominate the dog, make sure they spend time on their back, (after calming down and becoming submissive) with you over them. Any bites should be counteracted with AT LEAST a strong touch. Don't HURT the animal, but assert your position. A dog needs to "fear" it's alpha... but our definition of fear is different, to a dog, it's basically a respect for the alpha. If the dog acts out of line, it needs to know there are consequences.

Two of my dogs don't need to be touched when they are bad, a yell or noise scares them enough, and they discontinue the behavior. Dogs who continue the negative behavior and seem unaffected by words, need to be reminded that you are serious.

In a pack, if the alpha is challenged, it could ultimately lead to the subordinate dog's death. Obviously, nobody is telling you to kill your dog, just helping shed some light on the idea that smacking your dog is bad.

Look at children these days, you can't spank them at all. Look how we've all turned out. We are all entitled to everything, we don't listen, we disregard authority, we don't apply ourselves, we don't respect our elders, let alone our parents, and school grades are worse than ever.

Ideally, a minimal smack on the bottom of a bad dog will get the point across and really only have to happen once. What do I know, I have four well-behaved dogs, worked at a vet for a few years, and offer puppy training to local people in the area.

Again, we need to accept that dogs are dogs, not people, not kids, not toys, not inanimate objects, and not anything other than a canine.

Sorry for the 10 page essay, I hope it helped. I am new on these forums, so I figured I would jump right in to a discussion I felt I could offer a valuable two cents on.

Thanks Charger on Davins, this is pretty close to what I believe.

At first I was very confused reading this forum; it discussed the terms "dominant" and "alpha" as if they were negative. My understanding was "alpha" or "dominant" just meant it established the human as pack leader to be respected. It still means you are kind and loving and praise the dog; just firm when he/she needs to change behavior. I don't believe it's wrong to give a dog a light smack on the butt (it never hurt me as a child) but only on VERY rare occasions when nothing else has worked.

Also I have seen a few Cesar episodes and in the ones I saw he never did anything wrong. Mostly he just makes a shushing sound and then they listen. I saw him force a dog down once; but that dog was extremely aggressive and trying to bite him... and he wasn't rough or in any way harming the dog. Why is this viewed as negative? Are there bad episodes I haven't seen?


However, concerning choke collars and the like... Those things are legal?!! That's not discipline it's abuse.

Finally I would say it depends on the dog. My childhood dog, Sunny occasionally needed a butt smack but it was very rare and it always worked. (He was a wonderful dog so it didn't happen often). One example: he used to jump up on people and we repeatedly told him no. Didn't work. Upped it to raised voices and it still didn't work. This went on for a few months. Then one day he jumped on my little sister (she was 2 at the time) and knocked her down and she hit her head. She was okay but it really scared mom and Sunny got spanked. A few times of that and he stopped.

On the other hand my current dog; Sandy is so sensitive I wouldn't dream of spanking him because he'd have a heart attack. If I even raise my voice the slightest he's crushed and cringing. Once my mother raised her voice in dismay (not anger) because he threw up without warning all over the carpet and he actually wet himself. I know that's extreme but it illustrates my point.

 

[ChargerOnDavins]

Weird, I hear that from compulsion type trainers all the time, but its funny how that type of thought always goes back to human version of dominance and all kinds of misdguided and wrong scientific evidence... which is it? Because comparing is what you did when you said in the thread earlier: "However, I think the fact that everything is so positive and there is no negative correlation with doing wrong has bred the generation of children (gen y) who all feel entitled to everything, have no respect for their elders, cannot keep a job, cannot stay commited to one person, abandon their children, and everything is all about them. I am a part of generation Y myself, and I am sickened by many in my generation cohort.

I think for children, and very intelligent dogs, a certain degree of "alpha" needs to be employed. For lesser intelligent dogs (I have two) they are easily trained in a positive manner for the most part. I think it depends. Caesar does use a lot of alpha mentality on his show. None of my methods are stolen from him, mine came from pack observation. He only reaffirmed many of my beliefs, although we disagree on a few things."

So, which is it it's not okay for positive enforcement people to use human emotions, but ok for the other camp?

Compulsion doesn't work properly for most because humans aren't meant to abuse their dogs with physical touch all the time, have bad timing, use alpha rolls, choke chains and god knows what else.
I have done Schutzhund work and Agility and trained with both theories. I am very sorry I had done true compulsion in the past... Those methods will not work to produce a happy working dog. That's why I am so much against it now, can you honestly say you have even tried positive enforcement only? Yes or No? So perhaps you don't have all the information about the methods you're criticizing so heavily

oh good God

I was pretty sure what I said all along was clear, and you took what I said out of context.

1) I explain on every thread that I post my "methods" on, that it is what works for ME. I NEVER claim someone else's methods are "invalid". I say I believe STRONGLY mine are more effective, sure.

2) Positive Reinforcement - Was the starting point for every dog I have ever owned. Why jump the gun and display negative behavior if the dog responds to positive behavior? Just like children - are you going to spank your child for something it did only a few times? Or when it's REALLY young and truly doesn't understand? OF COURSE NOT.

3) Abuse with physical touch? PLEASE. Touching your dog is not abuse. I was abused as a child. I have stories that would make you bleed out of your eyeballs. I know EXACTLY what the difference between corrective action and abuse is. Don't begin to lecture me on that subject

4) My point about my generation cohort who has been babied and been treated with positive reinforcement is absolutely valid 100%. What evidence suggests otherwise? Our schools? Crime? Rape? Teenage Pregnancy? Theft? Vandalism? Work Ethic? What is done RIGHT these days?

5) As said literally almost on every thread I have posted, the TRUTH lies somewhere in the middle. Just like politics: IF the liberals had their way, we would all be a whiney worthless country with no spine who is taken over quicker than you can say sheltie, and if the conservatives had their way we would never change, never advance (although I think we are going backwards) and the whole world would be dead and nuked by now. Surely you can see the logic.

 

[ChargerOnDavins]

Thanks Charger on Davins, this is pretty close to what I believe.

At first I was very confused reading this forum; it discussed the terms "dominant" and "alpha" as if they were negative. My understanding was "alpha" or "dominant" just meant it established the human as pack leader to be respected. It still means you are kind and loving and praise the dog; just firm when he/she needs to change behavior. I don't believe it's wrong to give a dog a light smack on the butt (it never hurt me as a child) but only on VERY rare occasions when nothing else has worked.

Also I have seen a few Cesar episodes and in the ones I saw he never did anything wrong. Mostly he just makes a shushing sound and then they listen. I saw him force a dog down once; but that dog was extremely aggressive and trying to bite him... and he wasn't rough or in any way harming the dog. Why is this viewed as negative? Are there bad episodes I haven't seen?


However, concerning choke collars and the like... Those things are legal?!! That's not discipline it's abuse.

Finally I would say it depends on the dog. My childhood dog, Sunny occasionally needed a butt smack but it was very rare and it always worked. (He was a wonderful dog so it didn't happen often). One example: he used to jump up on people and we repeatedly told him no. Didn't work. Upped it to raised voices and it still didn't work. This went on for a few months. Then one day he jumped on my little sister (she was 2 at the time) and knocked her down and she hit her head. She was okay but it really scared mom and Sunny got spanked. A few times of that and he stopped.

On the other hand my current dog; Sandy is so sensitive I wouldn't dream of spanking him because he'd have a heart attack. If I even raise my voice the slightest he's crushed and cringing. Once my mother raised her voice in dismay (not anger) because he threw up without warning all over the carpet and he actually wet himself. I know that's extreme but it illustrates my point.

Glad someone else see's the light

Again people go with humanizing dogs.. "dog's must all wish they weren't subordinates, they all are unhappy unless they are pack leaders" HOGWASH.

There is NOTHING negative about asserting alpha or dominant behavior on your dog. NOTHING. Infact,I never stop hearing how WONDERFUL my dogs are, and how everyone who meets them says "I wish my dogs loved me and respected me like yours."

So to those who disagree with my methods: if you're OK with how your dogs are, and you don't want control, and you want to open possibilities for future biting of children, nervous behavior, confusion, and even becoming a subordinate, that's your choice. They are your pets, not mine. My babies are happy, healthy, energetic, personable, and wonderful.

And yes, again I agree some dogs do respond best to positive reinforcement without any negativity. Typically, ornery dogs and even some "in the middle" dogs who aren't skittish nor ornery will need some correction every here and there. It is a NATURAL part of a pack. Our job as pet owners is to mimic as best we can the social structure dogs have evolved to understand. We may have "evolved" dogs appearances, and even a lot of their behaviors, but their social structure is deeply embedded in their instinct.

Before anyone tells me it doesn't work. I welcome ANY of you to come visit my pack. Let's compare behavior.

 

[take4roll10]

I'm locking this thread.

While we accept healthy debates on the forum, this debate is completely off topic and has gone off topic too many times.

Personal opinions need to stop being confused for facts. Just because methods work for one person and their dog(s), doesn't mean it works for everyone else. And that doesn't make one better than other. If I continue to see disrespectful, arrogant, not open minded and condescending posts, I will start deleting them.