Belle has never grabbed or shook any of her pups either. They only time she ever really got mad and snapped at them was when she didnt want to nurse them anymore. Even then it was just a quick growl and snap, i am not sure if she even made contact.
Training techniques: Caesar vs. the rest???
- Thread starter BarbV
- Start date
Belle has never grabbed or shook any of her pups either. They only time she ever really got mad and snapped at them was when she didnt want to nurse them anymore. Even then it was just a quick growl and snap, i am not sure if she even made contact.
danisgoat
Moderator
Not here either! The last of our 11 setter puppies just left (except for Lily who we are keeping) and the mommy NEVER once picked up her puppy and shook it. Never in my life have I seen this with our moms and pups.
This is what our moms do as well.
KarenCurtis
Forums Sage
We all humans, I have yelled at my dogs, it felt good at the moment, produced no long lasting results. My friend has t- shirt " Dog Whispering does not work, I am a dog Yeller" or something to that degree
Your dogs are refection of your abilities as a trainer. If you did not teach them to "go place" when doorbell rings why get upset when they don't?
You are exactly right. I have not taught Sandstorm this, and whenever the grocery delivery people come in with my bags of food, he barks like crazy. It is annoying and loud, however I can't get angry- it is my fault, not Sandstorms. There are two things I have not trained for;
the grocery delivery and barking/rushing at the T.V. It is just laziness, pure and simple!!:sadsmile:
I KNOW that if we had Sandstorm come to us when he starts barking at the T.V., make him sit with us instead (using his collar or leash), and give rewards, it would work. But nobody wants to get up off the sofa to do this in the evening!
The grocery delivery is another story, I really don't know what to do.
In our house the barking over the TV would end quickly because my hubby loves his television and would not want the dogs making noise so that he couldn't hear. He would also get fussed if the dogs were barking over grocery delivery but in that case hubby would get hushed because in my opinion, 'if your not packing them in, you can't be complaining!!
Many new owners (and some who ought to know better) seem to think the new puppy comes pre programmed with a set of commands. I watch them come to our puppy training classes with a baby puppy. They say "sit, sit, sit sit" over and over again usually in a flat tone and are surprised when the dog doesn't obey.
Only a couple of days ago, Epic was barking and Garry went to the pen and said firmly 'shut up Epic'. I asked him just what he thought that was going to achieve, as Epic has no concept at all of what that combination of sounds is meant to mean (my command is 'quiet'). I find that whispering 'quiet' and giving a treat when the barking stops is working to produce the desired result - but it isn't as theraputic as hollering 'shut up'! Shouting, pushing the dog around or hitting it are all about trying to exert control, rather than communicating what you want the dog to do. From the TV clip I posted about earlier, many of the public who commented in the trainer's favour were under the impression that positive training is about bribing dogs to be good, which shows they haven't grasped it at all.
Revel very effectively tells Epic when he is near to crossing the line with a growl and lip curl. If I try and mimic this method, it has very little impact. To me this plainly shows dogs are not stupid and know we are not their mother or another dog - trying to copy behaviours that dogs use when they are interacting with each other isn't going to work.
I remember the first time I used a clicker. I trained Yogi to go down, something he was very adverse to doing, and it really was as if suddenly his face lit up and he was thinking "oh I understand now - that's what she wants me to do!" It was amazing and quite humbling to suddenty be able to communicate with him.
Only a couple of days ago, Epic was barking and Garry went to the pen and said firmly 'shut up Epic'. I asked him just what he thought that was going to achieve, as Epic has no concept at all of what that combination of sounds is meant to mean (my command is 'quiet'). I find that whispering 'quiet' and giving a treat when the barking stops is working to produce the desired result - but it isn't as theraputic as hollering 'shut up'! Shouting, pushing the dog around or hitting it are all about trying to exert control, rather than communicating what you want the dog to do. From the TV clip I posted about earlier, many of the public who commented in the trainer's favour were under the impression that positive training is about bribing dogs to be good, which shows they haven't grasped it at all.
Revel very effectively tells Epic when he is near to crossing the line with a growl and lip curl. If I try and mimic this method, it has very little impact. To me this plainly shows dogs are not stupid and know we are not their mother or another dog - trying to copy behaviours that dogs use when they are interacting with each other isn't going to work.
I remember the first time I used a clicker. I trained Yogi to go down, something he was very adverse to doing, and it really was as if suddenly his face lit up and he was thinking "oh I understand now - that's what she wants me to do!" It was amazing and quite humbling to suddenty be able to communicate with him.
In all the litters I helped raise while I was growing up (probably about 15-20 labs & goldens), I never saw a mama dog SHAKE a pup. About as bad as I've seen is a show of teeth and a stinkeye. Most puppies will be stopped in their tracks by that. We once had a lab bitch that had to have her litter hand-raised because she tried to harm them. She was spayed and never bred again. But that was completely abnormal. (This bitch was also in general very neurotic.) As a rule, mama dogs are gentle, but firm with their pups and that includes first-time mamas.
As someone else observed, we are NOT our dogs' mamas. We are the alpha pack member, but NOT a canine - dogs are smart enough to know we're not dogs. They have been successful in evolutionary domestication over the millenia due to the fact that dogs are extremely flexible in who they consider a pack member (be it humans, other dogs, cats, etc.).
Your average dog owner knows nothing of canine behavior or psychology, and oftentimes will not even grant the dog the intelligence to know differences in environment, emotions, and situations. Yet they insist that a dog be told to do something ONCE and ONLY ONCE (never being shown what the desired behavior might be) and understand perfectly. Those who watch these TV trainers with open mouths, thinking that they are seeing miracles simply don't know dogs. How many times (after you knew how dog training works) seen trained dog actors on tv, and were able to almost pinpoint where the handler was standing? Yet most people can't see this.
In my opinion, dogs have to be at the very least, mildly telepathic or they wouldn't have been as successful in "infiltrating" the human world as they have!
Sorry to go on for so long - but this is something that is near and dear to my heart!
As someone else observed, we are NOT our dogs' mamas. We are the alpha pack member, but NOT a canine - dogs are smart enough to know we're not dogs. They have been successful in evolutionary domestication over the millenia due to the fact that dogs are extremely flexible in who they consider a pack member (be it humans, other dogs, cats, etc.).
Your average dog owner knows nothing of canine behavior or psychology, and oftentimes will not even grant the dog the intelligence to know differences in environment, emotions, and situations. Yet they insist that a dog be told to do something ONCE and ONLY ONCE (never being shown what the desired behavior might be) and understand perfectly. Those who watch these TV trainers with open mouths, thinking that they are seeing miracles simply don't know dogs. How many times (after you knew how dog training works) seen trained dog actors on tv, and were able to almost pinpoint where the handler was standing? Yet most people can't see this.
In my opinion, dogs have to be at the very least, mildly telepathic or they wouldn't have been as successful in "infiltrating" the human world as they have!
Sorry to go on for so long - but this is something that is near and dear to my heart!
BarbV
Forums Celebrity
Well, I guess that I'm mistaken. I'm not a breeder, but it was my understanding that canine mothers DO discipline their pups this way. Maybe I'm thinking about in the wild....wolves, foxes...for sure, if the pups misbehave, then they are picked up by the scruff of their necks and moved away. Though maybe I'm wrong about the shaking part.
So, please, I've still playing devi's advocate there, so please don't beat me up.....It seems to me that the scruff is both the most sensitive part (from a dominance point of view) and the least sensitive part from a pain point of view. Hence why mother's grab their pups at their scruffs.
It seems to me that any training technique that leverages off what a mother would do should be effective, yes?
I've found that if I just put my two forefingers on Indy's neck....it calms him down almost immediately. ...all the stuff that everyone hates about CM....but isn't that what a mother pup does?
So, please, I've still playing devi's advocate there, so please don't beat me up.....It seems to me that the scruff is both the most sensitive part (from a dominance point of view) and the least sensitive part from a pain point of view. Hence why mother's grab their pups at their scruffs.
It seems to me that any training technique that leverages off what a mother would do should be effective, yes?
I've found that if I just put my two forefingers on Indy's neck....it calms him down almost immediately. ...all the stuff that everyone hates about CM....but isn't that what a mother pup does?
ClantyreSheltie
Forums Sage
From my brief training on the Gentle Leader, there is a pressure point right behind the occipital bone. If the head collars are fitted properly, they press right on that point and calm the dogs. I did sometimes find that dogs in those collars would fall sound asleep in class.
BarbV
Forums Celebrity
Now that's really interesting.....I wasn't aware of that. It does however tie back into most effective training techniques......
Phew...I stop checking the threads for a week and this is what happens??? I've scanned most of the messages, and I'm going to throw my two cents in:
Re: the video: The aggression was redirected aggression - Ceasar got in over his head. If he had been more into positive reinforcement, he may have gained control in the first few seconds by asking for a behaviour the dog was confident with (ie. a sit), reinforcing it positively, and getting the dog to work with him instead of against him. This MAY have worked - I would have been ready to react just in case it didn't. Once the dog committed to the attack, the only option Ceasar had was to control his head by keeping the collar up and using the leash to control his movement. There truly was no other option - if I was in that position, and a large dog committed to attacking while I was on the other end of the leash, I would have done the exact same thing. People need to keep in mind that dogs can do serious damage.
Where he went wrong: The biggest area (as far as I'm concerned) where he went wrong was not explaining to his audience that he screwed up, he set the dog up for failure, and that he wasn't choking the dog to train it, he was choking the dog to save his own hide after he screwed up. I never would have put myself in that position in the first place. This isn't an abandoned/unknown dog - there is a clear history of aggression. For dogs who I know have a history of aggression, I spend a ton of time establishing the basics and developing a relationship with the dog. Once the groundwork was done (and this could take months), I would expose the dog to the situation which had triggered the aggression, but I would have a muzzle on him (which I would have pre-conditioned him to as well). I have a lot more flexibility in how I control a muzzled dog who is in attack mode as opposed to an unmuzzled dog. I would have counter conditioned a competing emotional response. I would have tried to consider every possible trigger event and worked with the dog while those triggers were present. Also, ALL of this would have been in combination with the owner.
My biggest issue with the "popular" trainers on TV: This issue showed in the forum posts: people thought Caesar was choking the dog to train, as opposed to choking the dog because the dog could have maimed or even killed him otherwise. Now, on this forum, most people (thankfully) see this in the negative sense. Unfortunately, many average viewers trying to train their dogs at home will think about this in the positive sense, and choke their dog to punish any type of reactive behaviour. IMO, many of these training shows do more damage than good because they don't show any of the pre or post-training. You can't solve a dog's problems in an hour any more than you can teach a whole course of advanced calculus in an hour. What's even sadder to me is that there are people advertising themselves as "dog trainers" whose whole knowledge base is built upon watching shows like "Dog Whisperer" and "At the End of My Leash". I think the initial concept was good, if the audience was people who understood dog training and recognized the realities that were not being said. However, the huge majority of people have no idea what they are doing with their dogs, so the concept is disastrous.
(Finally) My Philosophy on Dog Training:
1. I firmly believe that the type of trainer I am reflects the type of person I am/want to be, and I keep this in mind when choosing my training methods. Therefore, I don't hit, slap, shake, or knock over my dogs. I prefer to focus on positive reinforcement through clicker training.
2. I often tell my students that in order to train dogs, they have to keep half an eye on their "Goodwill Bank". I put good will in the bank by using positive reinforcement. Every time I pet, play with, train, reward, or snuggle my pups I'm depositing into the bank. Correcting the dog (in any form) is a withdrawal from the bank. I tell my students they never want to get into an overdraft situation, because that's when their dogs start shutting down on them. A healthy balance in the goodwill bank = a healthy relationship with their dog. As a trainer, before I work with a dog where I know there's a history of aggression, I make sure there's a lot in the goodwill bank before I put it in a situation where a correction is necessary - otherwise, I'm setting myself and the dog up for failure.
Re: the video: The aggression was redirected aggression - Ceasar got in over his head. If he had been more into positive reinforcement, he may have gained control in the first few seconds by asking for a behaviour the dog was confident with (ie. a sit), reinforcing it positively, and getting the dog to work with him instead of against him. This MAY have worked - I would have been ready to react just in case it didn't. Once the dog committed to the attack, the only option Ceasar had was to control his head by keeping the collar up and using the leash to control his movement. There truly was no other option - if I was in that position, and a large dog committed to attacking while I was on the other end of the leash, I would have done the exact same thing. People need to keep in mind that dogs can do serious damage.
Where he went wrong: The biggest area (as far as I'm concerned) where he went wrong was not explaining to his audience that he screwed up, he set the dog up for failure, and that he wasn't choking the dog to train it, he was choking the dog to save his own hide after he screwed up. I never would have put myself in that position in the first place. This isn't an abandoned/unknown dog - there is a clear history of aggression. For dogs who I know have a history of aggression, I spend a ton of time establishing the basics and developing a relationship with the dog. Once the groundwork was done (and this could take months), I would expose the dog to the situation which had triggered the aggression, but I would have a muzzle on him (which I would have pre-conditioned him to as well). I have a lot more flexibility in how I control a muzzled dog who is in attack mode as opposed to an unmuzzled dog. I would have counter conditioned a competing emotional response. I would have tried to consider every possible trigger event and worked with the dog while those triggers were present. Also, ALL of this would have been in combination with the owner.
My biggest issue with the "popular" trainers on TV: This issue showed in the forum posts: people thought Caesar was choking the dog to train, as opposed to choking the dog because the dog could have maimed or even killed him otherwise. Now, on this forum, most people (thankfully) see this in the negative sense. Unfortunately, many average viewers trying to train their dogs at home will think about this in the positive sense, and choke their dog to punish any type of reactive behaviour. IMO, many of these training shows do more damage than good because they don't show any of the pre or post-training. You can't solve a dog's problems in an hour any more than you can teach a whole course of advanced calculus in an hour. What's even sadder to me is that there are people advertising themselves as "dog trainers" whose whole knowledge base is built upon watching shows like "Dog Whisperer" and "At the End of My Leash". I think the initial concept was good, if the audience was people who understood dog training and recognized the realities that were not being said. However, the huge majority of people have no idea what they are doing with their dogs, so the concept is disastrous.
(Finally) My Philosophy on Dog Training:
1. I firmly believe that the type of trainer I am reflects the type of person I am/want to be, and I keep this in mind when choosing my training methods. Therefore, I don't hit, slap, shake, or knock over my dogs. I prefer to focus on positive reinforcement through clicker training.
2. I often tell my students that in order to train dogs, they have to keep half an eye on their "Goodwill Bank". I put good will in the bank by using positive reinforcement. Every time I pet, play with, train, reward, or snuggle my pups I'm depositing into the bank. Correcting the dog (in any form) is a withdrawal from the bank. I tell my students they never want to get into an overdraft situation, because that's when their dogs start shutting down on them. A healthy balance in the goodwill bank = a healthy relationship with their dog. As a trainer, before I work with a dog where I know there's a history of aggression, I make sure there's a lot in the goodwill bank before I put it in a situation where a correction is necessary - otherwise, I'm setting myself and the dog up for failure.
Last edited: