Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think this is correct. The alpha rolling was only used when there were unprovoked attacks on other dogs. These were no little scraps, they were kill attempts.
Not only are all dogs unique, but dogs under intense training change week to week and the appropriate training methods will change.
Many professionals when presented with a large, aggressive dog initiating repeated kill attempts would suggest humane euthanasia as an option. Some would even advise it depending on the environment. Your case is unusual.
Regarding dogs under intense training: I don't think training methods necessarily change...although they may for those who utilize more than one method...but specific approaches within a particular method certainly can.
Good conversation and exchange of ideas going on here. It is easy for us to throw around terms and names loosely, and there is a benefit to doing so because it is shorthand that allows us to quickly identify ourselves, but it is also divisive and reductive.
Yes, DCF you are correct that it is almost impossible for even the best trainer to use ONLY positive reinforcement- for multiple reasons. For instance, there is debate over how much frustration the dog should be placed under when shaping, and even the gentlest training methods often include the implication of coercion. That doesn't mean though that we shouldn't try to do whatever we need to do to engage the dog and make them a partner in training.
"Dominance" is a poisoned term, and honestly, I think "leadership" has in some cases become code for dominance.
Jumpindogs has provided an extremely comprehensive and coherent explanation of positive training methods that I am not able to improve on. I will just offer that when I volunteered in a rescue shelter I worked with all manner of unfamiliar dogs. I never taught the shelter dogs cues (commands), rather I taught them default behaviors. Understand, I often had only one shot at getting that dog to learn basic manners- I was only there one day a week, so I knew I couldn't train comprehensively the way I would train my dogs, but if I could get that dog to run up to someone and sit in front of them and look adorable (and not jump), well, then I felt like I had done my job because just that much could get a dog adopted, and I could train the basics of a nice sit in about 10 minutes max, same with walking nicely next to someone, and same for getting dog to focus. All using a clicker and reinforcing desired behavior with high value treats.
Dogs, well actually all animals with a brain stem including humans, practice behaviors that get them the desired reinforcement. So, reinforcing good behavior gets attention fast, as does controlling the environment, and managing resources. When I bring a new foster dog into the household their training starts the moment I meet them- bad behavior is not tolerated or rewarded, and good behavior is reinforced. All foster dogs are hand fed for at least the first 2 weeks, and work for each mouthful by sitting back and waiting nicely before the next handful. We practice the Nothing in Life is Free protocol: they are expected to ask nicely for what they want, and they work for everything they get even if it is just a nice sit before I throw a ball. Their environment is tightly controlled- they go through crate training, learn impulse control, and how to behave nicely around the house dogs. I work at catching and rewarding good behavior= they lie down nicely and are quiet a treat gets tossed, they randomly look at me, another treat, they relinquish a low value toy to me they get a high value treat, they sit nicely in front of the back door the door magically opens and they get to go out, they want to go for a walk then they have to sit and wait patiently while they get leashed up and invited out the door. All of this very quietly and effectively puts me in charge- of everything. I put what the dog wants on cue and use it as a reinforcer- dog wants on the bed, ok fine, but what I train is that when they get OFF the bed they get a treat, so yes they can get on, but they learn that getting off often carries a higher reward, because they aren't allowed on until they get off on cue.
With foster dogs and my own dogs, I take the things that they-the dog- chooses as rewarding and make it a reinforcer which isn't always food. When they are walking nicely on leash I release them to go sniff a fire hydrant, or I put them into a down before letting them chase squirrels, or retrieve a ball (= a very high value reward), so positive training isn't about dangling a cookie or anything else in front of a dog, it is about using what the dog wants to get what you want. The dog gets to say what is reinforcing- my one dog is a tugging fool and finds playing tug far more rewarding than food. The other dog just likes to be challenged, loves to work, so for her the work is rewarding. Both dogs work for treats, but the treats are a reward for a job well done, like giving a kid $20 after they mow the lawn- dogs and kids want to be paid, but what is valuable can change at any given point in time.
>"I wonder why proponents seem so averse to training based upon natural dog relationships."<
I am not averse to training based on natural dog relationships- BUT I think we need to define just what is meant by that- what exactly would that look like? I use the dog's natural tendencies to repeat behaviors that are reinforced, I allow the dog to choose what is reinforcing to them, I work from the dog's desire for resources- whether it be food, squirrels, or the bed. I use body blocks and body pressure, both of which dogs use with one another. It is difficult though because we have to be careful not to misconstrue what exactly the natural dog-dog relationship is. There is a lot of nonsense that arises from human attempts to decipher dog relationships, and much of it can be quite damaging to the dog.
As far as Cesar Milan is concerned- some of his ideas are good= dogs need more exercise, boundaries, "a strong assertive leader", but the way he implements these ideas leaves a lot to be desired. Nothing good is ever gained by pushing a fearful dog to its limits or using intimidation or gratuitous force when there are other non-confrontational methods that will work better. Some of his early videos are truly sickening and heartbreaking. Too many inexperienced dog owners don't know any better and take him at face value without questioning his qualifications, without knowing that any nitwit can call themselves a dog trainer. For the life of me I don't understand it. From what you say, you have taken the best of his methodology and understand when to apply it effectively.
DCF I think that much of the divide between our training philosophies is a matter of semantics. I wouldn't use some of your methods, but you found a middle path that works for you and certainly has provided your dog with a good life. I appreciate your explanation which provides quite a different more comprehensive picture than the "sound bites" you were offering up previously.
If you are interested in learning more, and I warn you that it is addictive, Tawzer has a video rental service- about $15/month- with DVDs from all the truly world class trainers and behaviorists. I am not currently able to attend the APDT or clicker conferences, so Tawzer videos allow me to watch seminars from world-class trainers without the expense of the travel. You don't need to be a professional trainer to want to learn more about being a good trainer. We need more well-informed dog owners out there. BTW, I am not a professional trainer, just someone who through a turn of events got hooked into wanting to learn more about dog behavior and training methods. I take online seminars, read voraciously, take classes with the best trainers possible, and watch Tawzer videos to become a better trainer. Once I retire I will get my credentials, but for right now I am just a very good well-rounded amateur.
Last edited by twelvepaw; 08-06-2015 at 08:40 PM..
Regarding dogs under intense training: I don't think training methods necessarily change...although they may for those who utilize more than one method...but specific approaches within a particular method certainly can.
Right- we have to be able to adapt and be flexible within our methodology. There are countless ways to utilize positive reinforcement - one size does not fit all dogs- but a good trainer can adapt their methods to different dogs, situations, and contexts. The possibilities are only limited by the trainer's imagination and skill set.
Did you miss the study points? The dog park example was just the intro to the article. I provided the link because you asked for specifics and the study synopsis in the article provided some specifics.
Yes, "there are a lot of idiots who own dogs". That's one reason Cesar Millan's methods are so dangerous. Positive methods used incorrectly do no harm. Millan's methods used incorrectly have the capacity for great harm.
I think the main issue is to get dog owners to address their dog's needs. I appreciate the link.
With foster dogs and my own dogs, I take the things that they-the dog- chooses as rewarding and make it a reinforcer which isn't always food. When they are walking nicely on leash I release them to go sniff a fire hydrant, or I put them into a down before letting them chase squirrels, or retrieve a ball (= a very high value reward), so positive training isn't about dangling a cookie or anything else in front of a dog, it is about using what the dog wants to get what you want. The dog gets to say what is reinforcing- my one dog is a tugging fool and finds playing tug far more rewarding than food. The other dog just likes to be challenged, loves to work, so for her the work is rewarding. Both dogs work for treats, but the treats are a reward for a job well done, like giving a kid $20 after they mow the lawn- dogs and kids want to be paid, but what is valuable can change at any given point in time...
...DCF I think that much of the divide between our training philosophies is a matter of semantics. I wouldn't use some of your methods, but you found a middle path that works for you and certainly has provided your dog with a good life. I appreciate your explanation which provides quite a different more comprehensive picture than the "sound bites" you were offering up previously...
..BTW, I am not a professional trainer, just someone who through a turn of events got hooked into wanting to learn more about dog behavior and training methods...
Thanks for mentioning that, 12. I also use what my dogs find rewarding in the environment as you do...release to chase squirrels for a sit/wait at the door, down for a ball retrieve and release to sniff for loose leash walking are easy and readily available for many folks. I do this so often and so naturally now I didn't even think about it as reinforcing behavior. LOL!
I agree about DCF's previous "sound bites". They definitely threw me off in the beginning.
I am not a professional trainer either. But I am surrounded by them in friendships so something has rubbed off plus I am addicted to learning. About everything. Which may be obvious to some C-Ders at this point.
Many professionals when presented with a large, aggressive dog initiating repeated kill attempts would suggest humane euthanasia as an option. Some would even advise it depending on the environment. Your case is unusual.
Regarding dogs under intense training: I don't think training methods necessarily change...although they may for those who utilize more than one method...but specific approaches within a particular method certainly can.
There were personal reasons to attempt to save the dog, but he was on the bubble for about 6 months. I agree a professional trainer would be smart to have such a dog euthanized. My trainer works part time for a no-kill rescue farm that focuses on saving these types of dogs. He has a very good success record.
My approach to training hasn't changed, but the tools I use change as the dog has calmed down. Early on he was on the proverbial short leash. Today I use almost exclusively positive reinforcement because he has calmed to the point where he isn't much of a risk to other animals.
Good conversation and exchange of ideas going on here. It is easy for us to throw around terms and names loosely, and there is a benefit to doing so because it is shorthand that allows us to quickly identify ourselves, but it is also divisive and reductive.
Yes, DCF you are correct that it is almost impossible for even the best trainer to use ONLY positive reinforcement- for multiple reasons. For instance, there is debate over how much frustration the dog should be placed under when shaping, and even the gentlest training methods often include the implication of coercion. That doesn't mean though that we shouldn't try to do whatever we need to do to engage the dog and make them a partner in training.
"Dominance" is a poisoned term, and honestly, I think "leadership" has in some cases become code for dominance.
Jumpindogs has provided an extremely comprehensive and coherent explanation of positive training methods that I am not able to improve on. I will just offer that when I volunteered in a rescue shelter I worked with all manner of unfamiliar dogs. I never taught the shelter dogs cues (commands), rather I taught them default behaviors. Understand, I often had only one shot at getting that dog to learn basic manners- I was only there one day a week, so I knew I couldn't train comprehensively the way I would train my dogs, but if I could get that dog to run up to someone and sit in front of them and look adorable (and not jump), well, then I felt like I had done my job because just that much could get a dog adopted, and I could train the basics of a nice sit in about 10 minutes max, same with walking nicely next to someone, and same for getting dog to focus. All using a clicker and reinforcing desired behavior with high value treats.
Dogs, well actually all animals with a brain stem including humans, practice behaviors that get them the desired reinforcement. So, reinforcing good behavior gets attention fast, as does controlling the environment, and managing resources. When I bring a new foster dog into the household their training starts the moment I meet them- bad behavior is not tolerated or rewarded, and good behavior is reinforced. All foster dogs are hand fed for at least the first 2 weeks, and work for each mouthful by sitting back and waiting nicely before the next handful. We practice the Nothing in Life is Free protocol: they are expected to ask nicely for what they want, and they work for everything they get even if it is just a nice sit before I throw a ball. Their environment is tightly controlled- they go through crate training, learn impulse control, and how to behave nicely around the house dogs. I work at catching and rewarding good behavior= they lie down nicely and are quiet a treat gets tossed, they randomly look at me, another treat, they relinquish a low value toy to me they get a high value treat, they sit nicely in front of the back door the door magically opens and they get to go out, they want to go for a walk then they have to sit and wait patiently while they get leashed up and invited out the door. All of this very quietly and effectively puts me in charge- of everything. I put what the dog wants on cue and use it as a reinforcer- dog wants on the bed, ok fine, but what I train is that when they get OFF the bed they get a treat, so yes they can get on, but they learn that getting off often carries a higher reward, because they aren't allowed on until they get off on cue.
With foster dogs and my own dogs, I take the things that they-the dog- chooses as rewarding and make it a reinforcer which isn't always food. When they are walking nicely on leash I release them to go sniff a fire hydrant, or I put them into a down before letting them chase squirrels, or retrieve a ball (= a very high value reward), so positive training isn't about dangling a cookie or anything else in front of a dog, it is about using what the dog wants to get what you want. The dog gets to say what is reinforcing- my one dog is a tugging fool and finds playing tug far more rewarding than food. The other dog just likes to be challenged, loves to work, so for her the work is rewarding. Both dogs work for treats, but the treats are a reward for a job well done, like giving a kid $20 after they mow the lawn- dogs and kids want to be paid, but what is valuable can change at any given point in time.
>"I wonder why proponents seem so averse to training based upon natural dog relationships."<
I am not averse to training based on natural dog relationships- BUT I think we need to define just what is meant by that- what exactly would that look like? I use the dog's natural tendencies to repeat behaviors that are reinforced, I allow the dog to choose what is reinforcing to them, I work from the dog's desire for resources- whether it be food, squirrels, or the bed. I use body blocks and body pressure, both of which dogs use with one another. It is difficult though because we have to be careful not to misconstrue what exactly the natural dog-dog relationship is. There is a lot of nonsense that arises from human attempts to decipher dog relationships, and much of it can be quite damaging to the dog.
As far as Cesar Milan is concerned- some of his ideas are good= dogs need more exercise, boundaries, "a strong assertive leader", but the way he implements these ideas leaves a lot to be desired. Nothing good is ever gained by pushing a fearful dog to its limits or using intimidation or gratuitous force when there are other non-confrontational methods that will work better. Some of his early videos are truly sickening and heartbreaking. Too many inexperienced dog owners don't know any better and take him at face value without questioning his qualifications, without knowing that any nitwit can call themselves a dog trainer. For the life of me I don't understand it. From what you say, you have taken the best of his methodology and understand when to apply it effectively.
DCF I think that much of the divide between our training philosophies is a matter of semantics. I wouldn't use some of your methods, but you found a middle path that works for you and certainly has provided your dog with a good life. I appreciate your explanation which provides quite a different more comprehensive picture than the "sound bites" you were offering up previously.
If you are interested in learning more, and I warn you that it is addictive, Tawzer has a video rental service- about $15/month- with DVDs from all the truly world class trainers and behaviorists. I am not currently able to attend the APDT or clicker conferences, so Tawzer videos allow me to watch seminars from world-class trainers without the expense of the travel. You don't need to be a professional trainer to want to learn more about being a good trainer. We need more well-informed dog owners out there. BTW, I am not a professional trainer, just someone who through a turn of events got hooked into wanting to learn more about dog behavior and training methods. I take online seminars, read voraciously, take classes with the best trainers possible, and watch Tawzer videos to become a better trainer. Once I retire I will get my credentials, but for right now I am just a very good well-rounded amateur.
Thanks for the response. I particularly identify with the training methods you use for foster dogs. I stumbled onto many of them with my dog and use them with him. I particularly use the sit and wait phase of moving into activities he likes. I find that it helps him not to get over excited about things like going out for a walk. It also give me a chance to check the street to see if there are any challenges.
I hope leadership doesn't become a euphemism for dominance because the two imply completely different motivations to me. That may be a difference in vocabulary again, but from my military experience, leadership is based upon willing participation and dominance is force. Alpha rolling is a form of mild dominance, but I think it is warranted in some circumstances. Ultimately we all want dogs who obey because they want to please.
I hope leadership doesn't become a euphemism for dominance because the two imply completely different motivations to me. That may be a difference in vocabulary again, but from my military experience, leadership is based upon willing participation and dominance is force. Alpha rolling is a form of mild dominance, but I think it is warranted in some circumstances. Ultimately we all want dogs who obey because they want to please.
My guess is that when you use the term "alpha leadership" instead of "leadership" (along with your use of alpha rolling) people naturally and logically focus on the "alpha" as a descriptive. Alpha is often construed as dominance in dog training circles. And in many unrelated circles when used to describe a relationship.
From your post: "1. Establishing a position of alpha leadership."
I don't think you have to be concerned about leadership becoming a euphemism for dominance in the professional dog training world. Ain't gonna happen.
From Karen Pryor ("...leading spokesperson and teacher for effective force-free training across the globe. Her work with dolphins in the 1960s revolutionized animal training by pioneering and popularizing force-free training methods based on operant conditioning and the conditioned reinforcer."): Are You a Leader, or Just a Treat Dispenser? https://www.clickertraining.com/node/1104
My guess is that when you use the term "alpha leadership" instead of "leadership" (along with your use of alpha rolling) people naturally and logically focus on the "alpha" as a descriptive. Alpha is often construed as dominance in dog training circles. And in many unrelated circles when used to describe a relationship.
From your post: "1. Establishing a position of alpha leadership."
I don't think you have to be concerned about leadership becoming a euphemism for dominance in the professional dog training world. Ain't gonna happen.
From Karen Pryor ("...leading spokesperson and teacher for effective force-free training across the globe. Her work with dolphins in the 1960s revolutionized animal training by pioneering and popularizing force-free training methods based on operant conditioning and the conditioned reinforcer."): Are You a Leader, or Just a Treat Dispenser? https://www.clickertraining.com/node/1104
There are too many ideologues who half listen and then jumpt to conclusion. A leader is certainly willing to use coercion and even force when appropriate, but a smart leader is always trying to motivate the subject to want to obey. These are not dog training principles, there are principles that apply universally.
Took the dogs on a pack walk this morning. Some young trainers in the area started these awhile ago but I usually work weekends so can not go. I sort of have the weekend off. I say sort of as yesterday I spent half the day in a work related class
Yesterday was Dazzle 7th birthday so I decided a pack walk would be something he would enjoy so we went. There were probably 50-60 dogs and it was a beautiful walk. Many of the dogs are reactive dogs so the trainers are helping people that need help. It is all for free as I think they do it to help keep dogs from ending up back in the shelters which is very nice. They work with a couple of the local rescue groups. They do seem to follow Cesar Millan's style and many of the reactive dogs had pinch collars on which I am not fond of nor am I a fan of Cesar but being my two walk well with others it really did not effect us.
In the positive light I noticed them pointing out to many of the reactive dog owners that it often starts with eye contact so they need to pay attention and break that eye contact before the dog acts out. And then get their dog back to a calm relaxed state.
Dazzle was a great dog to go on this as he is so mellow and relaxed and reads other dogs well so he tends to have a calming effect on other dogs so a few owners asked if their reactive dogs could meet him and you could see the tension in the other dogs at first but Dazzle did not rush them and let them come up to him while he averted his eyes and none of them reacted to him in a negative way.
Chaos did well but some little pit that she had walked side by side with reacted to her after the walk and she responded back. I told her to sit she came around to my other side and sat and looked up at me very relaxed while the pit was still acting like she was going to eat Chaos. It took awhile for the other dog to get back to a calm state. One of the trainers saw it and came over to talk to the pits owner to help her get the dog calmed down and to make it stop staring at Chaos who now busy watching the drone flying around taking photos and totally ignoring the pit.
It was a fun way to spend a morning. I heard quite a few people say they wish they had other dogs owners to walk with. I often walk with friends and their dogs but am thinking it might be fun to start some smaller walking groups that walk during the week.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
