What to do in the future.. [Archive]

Grace Erick

04-17-2005, 01:57 AM

Hi Lorie, I know how you feel. This guy with a lab or retriever came down hard on his dog in some way that has left my mind, since I was so disturbed at his behavior because his dog wanted to come over to greet other dogs and he didn't like it. I wanted to say, "hey, this dog is your companion, not a companion meant for your to dominate", but I was somewhat confused as what to say as I was with my husband who may have been brought into maybe a physical confrontation based upon what I was saying.

He was correcting his dog with negatively and with brute reinforcement. It's so hard to change or correct the behavior on the spot of someone who deals with their dog companions on a certain level that they feel is correct no matter what you say to them. I felt wrong in not saying anything to him, but I guess we can't be responsible for all the wrongs in the world and can only do our best when we can with responsive people.

Old timers don't know about positive reinforcement etc. It's my way or the hwy with older people sometimes, especially old timers with dogs.

Sheryl

04-17-2005, 01:22 PM

That's a hard one. I live in a very small town in the north where many people have been raised differently than I was regarding pets. Many dogs here aren't really pets at all, just an animal to have tied up in the back yard and to feed your scraps to. I think I have mentioned in other postings about our local 'dog control' officer, a woman who is paid $50 per dog that she shoots, after she live traps them. If the dog has a tag, the owner is supposed to be able to pay the $50 to get the dog back, but like someone said, the dog tag isn't a bullet proof vest and if she needs the money bad enough (she has about 7 or 8 kids) she shoots them anyways. I have rescued three cats (still have two of them) because she doesn' "waste her bullets" on cats, and hangs them instead. I called the municipality about this and they said that they don't pay her to get rid of cats, only dogs so there isn't anything they can do. I am afraid to call the police because she has been known to trap dogs or just take them off of people's property if she doesn't like the person or the dog, and kill the dog.
So I do all that I possibly can for the pets of the community. I put up signs at various times of the year at the local store, post office, etc about heat stroke, dangers of antifreeze, why to spay and neuter, the importance of shots, etc. And every time the vet visits, I pay for a few people's animals to be fixed if I know that they do their best looking after the animal but can't afford to have it spayed or neutered. Then I usually talk the vet into giving the shots for free at the same time.
I think that if we all do whatever small part we can, the world will eventually become a better place. In a bigger town or city, I would not hesitate to call the police if I saw acts of cruelty.

MutzzysMom

04-17-2005, 05:06 PM

Sheryl

04-18-2005, 07:49 PM

Ya, sometimes even I can't beleive that I live in this kind of place. I am not meaning to freak anyone out, but for the sake of learning something today, I'll tell you about other places that I have lived. I am in Northern Alberta right now, but have also lived in Northern Manitoba (another province for those outside of Canada). I work with First Nations people, and worked on a number of Reserves in Northern Manitoba. There is a huge dog problem on many reserves. People get dogs when they are puppies and are cute, then they stop looking after them when they get big and eat more food and aren't so cute. The dogs then do whatever they can to get food, and eventually start to 'pack up'. By this time they are not really pets anymore, and are more wild than anything. Some reserves are worse than others, but many many reserves in a number of provinces have similar a problem. Pretty much every year somewhere in Manitoba (and often in other provinces too) a child is killed by a pack of dogs. This then prompts the leadership (Chief and Council) to declare a 'dog shoot day', when anyone with a gun can get free bullets to shoot as many dogs as they can. I have actually witnessed a few of these, and usually end up sick to my stomach. The dogs are not humanely killed, people are shooting at them, sometimes wounding or maiming them, sometimes killing dogs that are tied up on people's porch, etc. People are told to stay inside on dog shoot day so nobody accidentally gets shot. The dead dogs are either left where they are shot or where they die, or are piled up in front of the Band office. Often the Band will pay 5 or 10 dollars for each dead dog. The problem is huge, and the underlying issues are even bigger. The poverty that people are living in is terrible (no running water, overcrowded often unfit housing, sometimes no electricity, 90% unemployment rates, alcohol and drug problems, etc etc). There is no easy answers to 'fix' the problems for the people, and often the animals are not even taken into account.
Sorry to be so depressing today.

Amber

04-18-2005, 08:13 PM

Jarrod, I am utterly surprised and horrified by the response you gave! I agree with Lorie...how can you sit and advertise a PB rescue group and condone abuse to a Pit! I volunteer at a no-kill animal shelter and let me tell you, we see a lot of nasty things come through our doors.

Saturday someone brought us a bait dog (a Pit) with blood and pus coming from where her ears would have been and a bloody nose and scars on her face and legs. She was extremely friendly to us, but not so much to our other dogs. We, not realizing that she was trained to fight, took off her chain leash and put her on a nylon leash. After which, she started tugging and trying to eat through the nylon leash...even jumping at my arms and biting my shirt! Luckily, we knew this as training behavior and tossed on her chain leash again...but she still kept trying to eat the nylon leash...until we threw her a bone. What would you have done, Jarrod? Would you have beaten her with the leash as well??

There are very few Pits that have come through our shelter that I have been afraid of, and not many people understand that. The only one I have ever been afraid of was one that bit our kennel attendant and then went after me. Just because it is hard to get a Pit to re-focus on you after they get into their "red zone", doesn't mean you should hit them with ANYTHING! This goes for any dog with ANY amount of aggression, but I focus this more on the Pit Bull breed, because of the people that OBVIOUSLY do not know how to train them, much less handle them when they get to their "red zone."

Jarrod Stafford

04-19-2005, 12:16 AM

Whoa whoa whoa! You really need to check yourself before you come at me like that. You don't know a damn thing about me, my dogs, what I do, or anything about the real story behind this thread. Who the hell are you to say I condone abusing dogs? I asked a few questions! I did not condone anything so don't put words in my mouth and do not jump to conclusions. You can be utterly surprised and horrified all you want, but the point is, neither of us were there to see what actually happened. I do support pit bull rescue and I am very active in it as well. How about you show me where I condoned abuse to any dog? This is exactly why I have not responded to any serious threads. People who jump to conclusions and point fingers at others like you have done.

So you acknowledge that it was a bait dog, but you didn't have any idea it was a fighting dog? Hmm...does that make any sense at all? Something else you should know about pit bulls, they don't need to be trained to fight. There are pit bulls that live their entire lives as loved family companions, but at the same time would go after any dog if given the opportunity. pit bulls don't need to be trained to fight, many of them possess that quality from over a hundred years of selective breeding. One second you say a dog was extremely friendly to you, the next minute you say the dog is jumping and trying to bite your arms and shirt. What would I have done in that situation? I would have advised the dog be destroyed. There are too many dogs dying in shelters, so dogs that are showing human aggression should be euthanized and the sooner the better. Human aggressive dogs should not take up the limited kennel space which should be used for dogs who are not human aggressive.

Just because it is hard to get a Pit to re-focus on you after they get into their "red zone", doesn't mean you should hit them with ANYTHING! This goes for any dog with ANY amount of aggression, but I focus this more on the Pit Bull breed, because of the people that OBVIOUSLY do not know how to train them, much less handle them when they get to their "red zone."

Since we are making accusations and jumping to conclusions...just out of curiousity, how much experience do you have with pit bulls? How many times do you think you have actually seen a pit bull in a "red zone?" I have an idea how many times ;) You own a Toy Poodle and a Shih-Tsu mix, correct? You talk about people that OBVIOUSLY do not know how to train pit bulls...are you an experienced pit bull trainer, or dog trainer in general? Do you honestly think you would have been able to do a better job handling a pit bull in a "red zone?" I'm sure alot of the story was not mentioned, and people will talk about things from their own perspective, so what one person saw may not have really been anything to someone else. I was not the witness to what happened but I do know that the owner removed himself and the dog from a bad situation that could have got worse. I apologize for being abrasive, but please don't jump to conclusions and say that I condone animal abuse. While I do not condone animal abuse, I do condone stupid human abuse and if I was an actual witness to someone beating their dog...you can bet that I would not be on a dog forum asking for advice on what to do. I would be all over anyone I saw hurting a dog.

Hee Yung Lee

04-19-2005, 07:38 AM

I asked a few questions! I did not condone anything so don't put words in my mouth and do not jump to conclusions. You can be utterly surprised and horrified all you want, but the point is, neither of us were there to see what actually happened.

I agree and it was a reason why I didn't jump in to this post-also because of the fact that the poster described the man with the pit bull as "scary looking." You can think I'm being oversensitive, but I do not like stereotypes or prejudice. I guess I just don't see why it was necessary to include that bit of information. Additionally, from the way a few of the members post here, they would probably say that I abuse my dog simply because I will give a leash pop here and there or scream bloody murder if they see someone using a prong collar.

Jarrod is very knowledgeable about pit bulls and an experienced handler. Believe me, he would never abuse a dog or support the abuse in any way.

heathea

04-19-2005, 08:47 AM

Wow, this was quite the posting...got my adrenaline up this morning, who needs coffee?

Firstly: You did the right thing by not confronting the scary man. 1. you don't know what the man would/could have done to you and 2. People are limited in what they can do regarding other peoples' dogs. Someone that scary and tense would have probably taken out his frustration on either you or his dog, neither of which I feel would have been a good thing.

Secondly: Jarrod, I think people were taken aback by you "lol" statment after animal cruelty. I realize you probably have seen your share of true animal cruelty while working with pit bull rescues and the idea of smacking a dog with a leash is laughable by comparison, but people with more sensitive or small dogs know that their dogs would be actually wounded if a leash was used to hit their dog. I have a great big thick headed monster whom I love dearly, her favorite game is to whack herself in the head with a rope-quite hard so I can see your point with a leash.

Thirdly: Sheryl, wow. I cannot really compare what I used to live with your situation, however down in the "rurals" of Southern IL where I used to live, the main purpose of a pet was to tie it to a tree as well. It was so depressing. I applaud your efforts and hope you do not give up hope. I eventually had to turn a blind eye where I used to live because people just didn't understand what the heck I was talking about. I was very happy to move back into a city.

Fourthly: Jarrod, I hope you do not get blasted regarding destroying the dog that was discussed earlier in the post. I completely understand your point of view and know that it is a hard road of working with rescue dogs to be able to make decisions like that. I wish there was a way to save every dog, unfortunately it does make the most sense to save only the most adoptable dogs, however there will always be people out there who prefer to rescue a dog with problems. I don't know why this is, but it is true. A dog who has special needs will invariably tug at the heart strings of certain people much more than a healthy well adjusted dog.
I think it comes down to the fact that people like to feel needed.

Anyway, this is the first posting in a long time which had some true feelings behind it and it was fun to read. I hope everyone has a decent day.
Take care,
Heather

MutzzysMom

04-19-2005, 02:25 PM

WOW Ill take a cup of that coffe! What a post to come home too!
I wasnt going to jump on board with this post either but to be frankly honest i tend to agree with Hee and yes even Jarrod. Now again i didnt see the situation but from what i understand he smacked the dog with a leash. OK i dont condone animal abuse however i think the question here is what is considered animal ABUSE? is a smack on the tush abuse. I dont think so. If the owner was repeatedly beating a dog...that is obviously a different story but the factors in this are interesting in that there was a confrontation that could have gotten a lot worse if the dog was not removed from the situation by the man. Maybe he had gotten scared. Take it from me who, when i was little and tripped on the sidewalk and fell and got hurt, i got yelled at. It a fear response many parents experience. YES i do think agression makes the dog more agressive but we dont know if this is a recurring thing, If i saw him being agressive towards the dog on more than one occasion....again this is adifferent story and i would contact the authorities. Also as someone mentioned this was an older man. Before doggie door i was never exposed to +r training and i am 21! My mom was a face in the pee, smack on the butt, holding the mouth kind of trainer with our chow. He is a wonderful dog, food agressive at times but with muitzzy around he has gotten a little more tolerant. Yes i chose the alternate route for my shih tzu and she is wonderful as well( i cant say ive never hit her but to be honest it never works anyway bc she just thinks im playing.) I do yell at times out of frustration...i know BAD ME! but for the most part i try and stay very positive. Now most people that i know of are not like that so maybe if you saw my mom after catching mutzzy in her freshly potted plants you would want to report her too. But there should be a distinction b/w punishment and abuse/cruelty. All im saying is we cant jump on each others backs for stating opinions. I think we all have valid points to our arguments. Lets all take a deep breathe and remember the only one who saw this is the original poster..not sure at this moment who that is exactly. I hope i dont get ripped apart but im just saying I think we all have a point.

Wow, this was quite the posting...got my adrenaline up this morning, who needs coffee?

Firstly: Hee Yung Lee you did the right thing by not confronting the scary man. 1. you don't know what the man would/could have done to you and 2. People are limited in what they can do regarding other peoples' dogs. Someone that scary and tense would have probably taken out his frustration on either you or his dog, neither of which I feel would have been a good thing.

Secondly: Jarrod, I think people were taken aback by you "lol" statment after animal cruelty. I realize you probably have seen your share of true animal cruelty while working with pit bull rescues and the idea of smacking a dog with a leash is laughable by comparison, but people with more sensitive or small dogs know that their dogs would be actually wounded if a leash was used to hit their dog. I have a great big thick headed monster whom I love dearly, her favorite game is to whack herself in the head with a rope-quite hard so I can see your point with a leash.

Thirdly: Sheryl, wow. I cannot really compare what I used to live with your situation, however down in the "rurals" of Southern IL where I used to live, the main purpose of a pet was to tie it to a tree as well. It was so depressing. I applaud your efforts and hope you do not give up hope. I eventually had to turn a blind eye where I used to live because people just didn't understand what the heck I was talking about. I was very happy to move back into a city.

Fourthly: Jarrod, I hope you do not get blasted regarding destroying the dog that was discussed earlier in the post. I completely understand your point of view and know that it is a hard road of working with rescue dogs to be able to make decisions like that. I wish there was a way to save every dog, unfortunately it does make the most sense to save only the most adoptable dogs, however there will always be people out there who prefer to rescue a dog with problems. I don't know why this is, but it is true. A dog who has special needs will invariably tug at the heart strings of certain people much more than a healthy well adjusted dog.
I think it comes down to the fact that people like to feel needed.

Anyway, this is the first posting in a long time which had some true feelings behind it and it was fun to read. I hope everyone has a decent day.
Take care,
Heather

Clair Taberner

04-20-2005, 04:08 AM

yes indeedy.i've been following this thread with interest. as an owner of a staffie x i'm well aware that a slap with a lead really isn't felt very much by a muscular type dog. yet i certainly don't condone animal abuse. each case has to be looked at individually to what happened and even down to the breed.great to have a thread so interesting

Jill Ramsey

04-20-2005, 07:17 AM

My :twocents:
As Francesca stated, some dogs just don't feel a slap. Labs are known to run into doors and walls, and sometimes people, and they just get up and do it again!!! Sometimes when Finnegan get "patted" for a good job,(especially if it's a man doing the patting) it's hard enough to be considered hitting a small dog. He loves it and comes back for more. I've never hit him with a leash or my hand. He likes nothing better than taking a rope with a tennis ball at the end and shaking it so it smacks him in the head over and over. :rolleyes: It's just a lab/large dog thing. The other day he ran full blast into our patio door. I had opened the inside door and was going to open the outside door and use the screen. He thought I had opened everything and tried to run outside, and went headfirst into the glass door! He just gave me one of those "what was that" looks. :D

Daniela Jantzen

04-20-2005, 08:02 AM

What I'm curious about is what should I do if I am confronted with animal cruelty in the future?
Call your local Humane Society.
I am sure they can give you some pretty good advice and contact numbers.

If you think this person is walking the pitbull in your area more frequently from now on, watch him and the dog. If you feel there is a definite need for action, talk to him frist (take your husband with you if you feel uncomfortable), suggest a good trainer in your area (who knows, maybe he is just at a loss himself about his dog's behaviour and is grateful for help?). If talking does not lead you anywhere, act according to the guidelines of your Humane Society.

Danny

Amber

04-20-2005, 11:17 AM

So you acknowledge that it was a bait dog, but you didn't have any idea it was a fighting dog? Hmm...does that make any sense at all? Something else you should know about pit bulls, they don't need to be trained to fight. There are pit bulls that live their entire lives as loved family companions, but at the same time would go after any dog if given the opportunity. pit bulls don't need to be trained to fight, many of them possess that quality from over a hundred years of selective breeding. One second you say a dog was extremely friendly to you, the next minute you say the dog is jumping and trying to bite your arms and shirt. What would I have done in that situation? I would have advised the dog be destroyed. There are too many dogs dying in shelters, so dogs that are showing human aggression should be euthanized and the sooner the better. Human aggressive dogs should not take up the limited kennel space which should be used for dogs who are not human aggressive.

The fact that Pit Bulls do not need to be trained to fight is well known to me, Jarrod. I have been around the breed for quite some time. It was the INTENSITY that she was doing it that made us come to our conclusion, and it was not I that came to that conclusion, it was the owner of the shelter. What I said was she was friendly to us, but the second we put on the nylon lead she started jumping at me and trying to tug and eat through the lead. She wasn't opening her mouth at my arms, but she did catch the end of my shirt. I volunteer at a NO-KILL shelter...the only one in my city, in fact. We put no dog down. The only reason she is in our shelter is so that we can hopefully prosecute the person/people that used her as a bait dog...or at least let someone know which neighborhood she came from, because that fact is known. She was not human aggressive towards anyone at any other time than when she was on that nylon lead. When she is on a chain lead or off lead, she is fine. Once again though...we aren't looking to adopt her out.

Since we are making accusations and jumping to conclusions...just out of curiousity, how much experience do you have with pit bulls? How many times do you think you have actually seen a pit bull in a "red zone?" I have an idea how many times

We get TOO many Pit Bulls in our shelter every day. I know the breed very well. I've dealt with the breed for about five years now, both in the shelter and out. I'm not going to say I've seen them in "attack mode" thousands of times, because that wouldn't be true. On the same note, I haven't counted either.

You own a Toy Poodle and a Shih-Tsu mix, correct?

My choice of personal dogs have nothing to do with my thread. I volunteer at a shelter that gets almost every type of dog imaginable. My Shih-Tzu mix CAME from the shelter I volunteer at, matter of fact. If you have seen some of my other posts, you would have seen that my preferred breed is Boxer, but on a compromise with the person I live with, I got a toy poodle.

You talk about people that OBVIOUSLY do not know how to train pit bulls...are you an experienced pit bull trainer, or dog trainer in general? Do you honestly think you would have been able to do a better job handling a pit bull in a "red zone?"

I am neither an experienced Pit Bull trainer or a dog trainer in general, but I do know NOT TO HIT A DOG! I don't care if they are muscular dogs and barely feel it...they know what it is. I know how my dogs react in certain situations, and if I see a problem situation up ahead, I don't go that direction. There are other things he could have done besides hitting the dog.

My previous thread was a reaction to your first a couple of lines of questions. I'm sorry if I came on too strong, but who cares what type of leash it was and how hard he hit the dog? The fact is the man still hit the dog. You may not condone full out animal abuse, but you are condoning someone hitting their dog, which is animal abuse...no matter how you look at it.

Hee Yung Lee

04-20-2005, 12:41 PM

The fact is the man still hit the dog. You may not condone full out animal abuse, but you are condoning someone hitting their dog, which is animal abuse...no matter how you look at it.

What do you mean that hitting a dog is considered animal abuse? I mean do you think a quick swat on the rear is animal abuse too? I would have to disagree with that. I know many people who have given their dogs a quick swat on the rear and I do not think they are being abusive to their dogs. There is a difference, and that is why animal abuse isn't merely defined by hitting a dog. My dad has given the occasional quick swat on the hinder to his dog and if anyone reported him, I would find it laughable. I used to jokingly tell people that my dad treats his dog (my parents are divorced) better than me. It was a joke, but it conveyed how pampered and spoiled his dog is.

I have never given Bogart a swat across the rear, but I have a feeling that if I did, it wouldn't matter. Actually he'd probably think it was fun or something. Just like Jill was describing with Finn, Bogart runs into walls, trees (he's not very graceful :rolleyes: ) and has this air dog toy attached to a rope that he shakes and it always gets him in the face. I have accidently stepped on his paws (with heavy shoes on) and I freaked out more than he did. In fact he doesn't even notice.

I just don't think you should cry abuse simply from seeing a person hit their dog, no matter how appalled you are. Check out other factors before you decide this person is abusing his dog...is the dog healthy looking...too skinny...losing lots of fur...etc. You may not be comfortable with any form of hitting or swats across the rear, but it doesn't necessarily mean that if someone else does it, they are abusing their dog.

I just wanted to add that the tone of our voices is sometimes not conveyed accurately on these posts. I just reread what I wrote and realized it sounded kind of angry, but I am not angry in any way. Consider my tone just neutral...I just wanted to share my opinion. Ok, hope that made sense.

Jarrod Stafford

04-20-2005, 12:50 PM

My choice of personal dogs have nothing to do with my thread. I volunteer at a shelter that gets almost every type of dog imaginable. My Shih-Tzu mix CAME from the shelter I volunteer at, matter of fact. If you have seen some of my other posts, you would have seen that my preferred breed is Boxer, but on a compromise with the person I live with, I got a toy poodle.

I am neither an experienced Pit Bull trainer or a dog trainer in general, but I do know NOT TO HIT A DOG! I don't care if they are muscular dogs and barely feel it...they know what it is. I know how my dogs react in certain situations, and if I see a problem situation up ahead, I don't go that direction. There are other things he could have done besides hitting the dog.

My previous thread was a reaction to your first a couple of lines of questions. I'm sorry if I came on too strong, but who cares what type of leash it was and how hard he hit the dog? The fact is the man still hit the dog. You may not condone full out animal abuse, but you are condoning someone hitting their dog, which is animal abuse...no matter how you look at it.

I could not disagree more with your last two paragraphs, so I guess we will agree to disagree. I just quoted the first paragraph because I was curious to know who made you think a Toy Poodle was a fair compromise from a Boxer? :rofl: I realize you don't know me so I just wanted to let you know I am just teasing you and I am very sarcastic. We all know that Toy Poodles are good dogs and wonderful accessories. lol

TimberWolf

04-20-2005, 01:22 PM

Amber

04-20-2005, 01:29 PM

MY MOTHER! :( lol... I'm staying with her until I get out of college. I want a Boxer soooo bad, but she thinks they are too big and they have too much energy...if only she knew what she was getting herself into when she said she would get the poodle! lol I did know you were teasing though...I just wanted you to know what type of dog I did want though. Quick question...Are Boxers grouped with the bully breed or is that just something that is going around?

No, I don't consider a quick swat animal abuse, but I don't think it's a good thing to do. It also depends on how much those "quick swats" occur.

Seeing as this is a topic that could go on...and on...AND ON...lol...I'll just say...I'm done. I do know what you mean by tone of voice though.

Maria Juliano

04-20-2005, 02:48 PM

[color=blue]Here is a great thread by Reene B on Canine Learning Theory on when/how to use +/-R & +/-P. We can all benefit from it!

http://www.doggiebagonline. com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif [b]Canine Learning Theory +/- R & +/-P
Ok guys, I'm gonna do my best to explain some basic learning theory. If I'm not making sense or I screw up, let me know!

Training Methods:

Postive Reinforcement (+R): Applying something to increase behavior

Negative Reinforcement(-R): Taking away something to increase behavior

Positive Punishment (+P): Adding something to decrease behavior

Negative Punishment (-P): Taking away something to decrease behavior

Examples:

+R: Owner says "Come Spunky!", Spunky complies and owner gives spunky a hotdog piece.

-R: Owner is teaching his dog to heel with a choke chain, dog is not heeling, owner then pulls the choke chain tight until dog heels, dog starts heeling, then owner releases the tightness on choke chain

+P: Dog sees owner and gets excited, dog jumps up to greet owner, owner knees dog in the chest, dog moves away from owner and doesn't jump

-P: An owner is playing with her new puppy, puppy nips owner, owner turns her back to puppy, leaves the room, and closes the door so the puppy can't follow

Ok, now lets talk about the rules of punishment - I'm mostly talking about +P and -R:

Punishers can suppress all behavior across the board - even the behaviors that you are trying to teach.

Punishers only temporarily suppress the undesired behavior. You still need to train the correct response to take the place of the undesired behavior. This is where we see a lot of fallout and other behavioral issues

Punishment is strongly associated with the handler. I think this needs no explaining.

Punishment is difficult to execute properly because the punishment needs to be only be associated with the target behavior (undesired behavior). This is impossible to execute because we get what is called a Unpredictable Avoidance Response. Which in plain english means that the dog didn't associate the punishment with his "bad behavior". He may have associated the punishment with the handler or the location (like the backyard). Now the dog starts avoiding the owner or the backyard

Punishment with poor timing isn't punishment, it's confusing to the dog and it's down right abusive. When I say timing I mean 0.5 seconds or less.

Punishers can lead to aggression in dogs - dogs are fight or flight animals. How many times would I have to punch you before you decide to punch me back?

Punishment must occur each and everytime the behavior does - otherwise you will only make the behavior stronger.

You must make a huge impression with a punisher and should only be a 1 time occurance (if used correctly). How much is too much? How much it too little. This is where people really get into trouble. I believe if people can't even train with +R and treats, they certainly wouldn't have the judgement to execute this particular point on punishers properly (I know I couldn't).

Punishment Summary:

On paper, punishment is highly effective, but then we add in all the side effects (see the above list) and consequences (fallout). This is why positive reinforcement is the more effective choice. Using punishment(-R/+P) correctly is generally more difficult than using (+R/-P). The stakes are much higher and we generally see a lot of fallout (erosion of the human-animal bond). For those of you who work at shelters, you may have even seen a dog who has Learned Helplessness. This is a dog who has been exposed to so much punishment and negativity that it just shuts down - its very sad.

Well, in a nutshell that is why we use +R/-P. I would like to talk more about Progression of Behavior and Learning, the ABC's of training, reward schedules, Reward Marks, No Reward Marks, Postive Directives, leash/collar desentization (how people mistakenly desentize their dogs to a gl and think they need a choke or prong) etc - but I'll get to that later. I have a doggie birthday to attend to. My neighbor's Husky just turned 3 and they are having cake and ice cream. Aren't dogs fun!

Jarrod Stafford

04-20-2005, 03:11 PM

Ok time to put on the moderator gloves. This is not yet a heated debate but I can tell that some people were a little upset at some opinions expressed here. I think it's time to clear things up.

Jarrod> Your opinions are very welcome here but you must understand something. Some of the members here were from the older doggie door forum where positive reinforcement was highly enforced. A lot of people get sensitive when they hear someone might be more of a supporter of punishment as a method of behavior correction. It seems you do support certain training methods that might seem a bit harsh to those that only use the positive reinforcement they learned from the previous forum. That is why you got blasted a bit here. It would be better to discuss the types of training you use or learned about in the Dog Training Philosophy & Methods forum where open discussions of different training ideas are brought up. It's not really a debate forum but if you believe in a certain type of training of certain dogs, that might be a fun place to post. You are welcome to express your ideas anywhere but just be mindful of the more sensitive dog lovers here that might view that treatment of a pit bull (for example) as cruel and not acceptable. Keep in mind, this forum is a strong supporter of positive reinforcement as a training method to dogs. Anything that sounds more like a negative punishment may raise some angry feelings. I urge you to please try to keep that in mind when discussing training methods.

Everyone> I understand the sensitive feelings that can be brought up when someone has a different opinion than your own especially on a sensitive subject such as this pit's treatment. However, this is a friendly forum and we do not blast our members here. If a member has upset you and you feel that person needs to have a moderator/adviser supervise or say something, please contact one of the staff for any future problems or questions about a member or topic.

-Moderator

If my opinions are very welcome here, why am I the only person you specifically mention? I did not blast anyone. I was called an animal abuser and maybe others would take that better than I did, but I was very offended. Why do I need to respond to this specific topic in another section? If I did that, who would associate my response to this specific topic? I was not even talking about training methods, I simply asked a few questions about the situation that occurred. The foundation of all of my training is positive reinforcement, but to limit training to only positive reinforcement is a bit closedminded in my opinion and I was simply trying to express that. Dogs need to be trained as individuals for specific things, different breeds do not share the same temperaments and dogs come in all shapes and sizes so how can you train all dogs using the same methods. I'm sure everyone knows what works for one dog, does not always work for the next. I understand there may be some regulars on this forum and I am just some new person, but I am not new to dogs. I was not trying to upset any sensitive members or raise any angry feelings. I just wanted to know a bit more about the incident that took place. I will not post anything else about dog training.

Jarrod Stafford

04-20-2005, 03:15 PM

Maria that is a fine post and I had already read it in another section, but not all trainers share Renee's ideaology.

aussiesmum

04-20-2005, 03:31 PM

Your origional post...

Animal cruelty? lol

Hardly simply asking for more information. This is actually mockin ghte origional poster.

How hard did he hit the dog with the leash? What type of leash was it? How did the dog respond and did he continue hitting the dog repeatedly?

As already pointed out, because violence was not condoned on DD many of use carry that with us. I jumped on you because I do not feel that ANY violence is appropriate. Is it ok if he beats his dog, as long as it isn't a chain leash? Just curious?

pit bulls can be extremely stubborn and determined dogs and when they focus their attention on another dog it can be very difficult to break that focus.

And this is why you have to be EXTREMELY active in their training. They ARE difficult to work with, but they are also smart as heck and can learn. A dog who is so eager to please and so smart doesn't require abuse or "hitting" no matter how "hard" it is.

aussiesmum

04-20-2005, 03:33 PM

Also, there was a thread made in training titled "The use of aversives in dog training " and it was fairly obvious that to me, it was at least in part a response to this thread. You could have easily done the same.

Jarrod Stafford

04-20-2005, 03:44 PM

Lorie Bonham - Samantha, had the same problem here, but the violence was much worse. I stood in awe for a while, then felt completely helpless that I could help this poor dog.

You watched a dog being violently abused while you stood in awe for awhile doing nothing. Please do not talk to me about animal abuse or training pit bulls.

aussiesmum

04-20-2005, 03:50 PM

Rather than make a personal attack on me you should answer the issues I raised.

Eric Vecc

04-20-2005, 04:08 PM

Wow, I think this IS a heated debate. Always has been (even on Doggie Door) and always will be. Everyone treats their dogs differently. Many people think their meathods are right and everyone else's are wrong. This is also the same reason so many abused dog's end up in shelters - the owner thinks they are training the dog correctly but it "just doesn't seem to get it!". I use a combination of many meathods - I call it MY MEATHOD. I use NILIF, +R and +P. Yes, my dog gets a smack on the bum when he doesn't listen. It may not be the best training meathod and it surely doesn't hurt him. It is just something I use so he knows I was disappointed with what he just did. He is a large breed dog and (like Finnagen) runs himself into walls harder than I hit him. I also use heavy +R. He gets reward of treats, pets and kisses when he listens.

I think so many people misuse the word "abuse". I have seen an "abused" dog and it just cowers in the corner for any noise or movement. An abused dog has seen more than just a smack on the bum (burns, punches, kicks, baseball bats...). Do you call Child Services when you see someone smack a kid on the butt? Can you imagine what this country would be like if your kid was taken away because you spanked him? Yes, Doggie Door did have a conservative approach and did not approve of ever laying your hand on your pet for misbehavior. My though behind this, is a REASONABLE person would understand if you told them to smack the dog on the butt, he would not do it hard. When you are speaking to the masses, you have to believe not everyone is REASONABLE and may take that to mean "hit the dog as hard as you can.". I am a reasonable person, with a dog that has a much freedom and love he can handle.

That is just my opinion!

Clair Taberner

04-20-2005, 05:03 PM

:clap: i couldn't of said it better eric

Hee Yung Lee

04-20-2005, 05:20 PM

I hope this post doesn't offend too many people, but I just wanted to add a few more things and this can also be a response to the "the use of aversives in dog training" thread.

With respect to the level of heat and polarization, I think dog training methods can be compared to the nature vs nurture debate that used to be prevalent in our society. Most people seem to be on either extreme of the dog training debate. My feeling, however, is that when someone mentions they use +P, those on the other end of the spectrum seem to assume that they are suggesting that aversives should be at the core of dog training. As Eric has pointed out, he uses +R as his core, but incorporates +P as needed. Yes, I feel that +R is the best way to train your dog, but some forms of +P can have a place in dog training, as well. I prefer to meet in the middle of this dog debate, as with anything, the best solution rarely lies at the extreme ends.

Those oppose to the use of +P consistently insist that it can create aggression in dogs. Show me one incidence of how using a pop on the leash, a quick swat to the hinder, use of a prong collar, etc has been the CAUSE of aggression in a dog. I already read the story in another post about how the dog was trained using traditional methods and then later reacted aggressively toward his owner. I guess I just think there is more to this story. I don't think using +P can create aggression simply from the fact that even dogs that have been severely abused (and dear god no one interpret this the wrong way) do not react aggressively. I have heard countless stories about how dogs are brought into shelters because of an abusive past and often the dogs are still very friendly to humans. You can not claim a causal relationship between the two and certainly not between +P and aggression. I think most times when a dog shows aggression, genetics plays a large part. Of course hitting the dog, etc. can exacerbate the problem.

I guess, I am just tired of hearing theories stated as facts especially when they are used to argue against something else. People keep saying that using a +R only method is more humane, but for whom? For the dog? Or for you?

My point is this. As some have already pointed out, every dog is unique and will respond accordingly to different training methods. No one specific training method or theory is better than another. You can achieve success with many methods. For me, what is most important is having an open mind. I would much rather seek a behaviorist or trainer who is willing to assess my dog and my situation with an open mind and suggest a program that fits our needs, rather than a trainer who is vested into a specific theory.

Anway, if you do use a +R only method, I think that is great, but do not judge others because they also incorporate +P.

I understand that this is primarily a +R only training forum and I do respect that and perhaps if I don't like what is being said, I should just keep my mouth shut or find another forum. :(

TimberWolf

04-20-2005, 10:29 PM

If my opinions are very welcome here, why am I the only person you specifically mention? I did not blast anyone. I was called an animal abuser and maybe others would take that better than I did, but I was very offended. Why do I need to respond to this specific topic in another section? If I did that, who would associate my response to this specific topic? I was not even talking about training methods, I simply asked a few questions about the situation that occurred. The foundation of all of my training is positive reinforcement, but to limit training to only positive reinforcement is a bit closedminded in my opinion and I was simply trying to express that. Dogs need to be trained as individuals for specific things, different breeds do not share the same temperaments and dogs come in all shapes and sizes so how can you train all dogs using the same methods. I'm sure everyone knows what works for one dog, does not always work for the next. I understand there may be some regulars on this forum and I am just some new person, but I am not new to dogs. I was not trying to upset any sensitive members or raise any angry feelings. I just wanted to know a bit more about the incident that took place. I will not post anything else about dog training.

Jarrod, you were singled out because people were responding to your post. You did NOT blast anyone and nor did I accuse you of blasting anyone in my post. I was saying YOU WERE blasted because of the hint of negative reinforcement that you seemed to be supporting. I was trying to help you out by explaining why people might have such a negative response to your post. You got defensive and I was only trying to keep any tempers down on everyone's part. I also am not saying you have to respond in another forum, but I was just advising you keep in mind the position some dog lovers have here on animal cruelty. I was pointing out the other forum because it might be something that would interest you. your opinions count here, however I thought that forum was up your alley as a way to discuss training methods. My suggestion was only meant as that and not an insult. You say you DO use positive reinforcement in your training but that might have been helpful in that post to mention that fact. It might have kept some members from "blasting" you like they did. If it were anyone else saying what you had said, then they too would have been singled out. This is still a basically new forum so I figured this time I would say it out loud not to blast anyone and to just go to a moderator if any troubles were to arise. I was saying that to everyone and that includes you. :)

I probably should have used a smilie in that first post to you, Jarrod, so you'd know it was not meant as anything negative. ;)

aussiesmum

04-21-2005, 12:55 AM

In response to Hee:

A think there are a number of issues going on in your thread. First, I think one of the biggest problems with any sort of "violence" is essculation. Right, a leach pop works, then a month later it stops working. Now what. Ok a new choke collar to make the dog "feel" the leash pop. Works for a month, then stops. Ok now what... etc. You get the point. Outside of the world of dogs, if you look at a situation of domestic violence, you can often trace the essculation from yelling, to hitting, to, well, more.

Second, because of the propensity for such essculation, people in general don't know how to use negative training. If I say "don't use a leash pop ever" it is pretty clear my meaning. But if I say it is ok, then at what level is it ok? I think you can read enough stories even here (and DD) about people who used trainers who were just not knowledgeable about using negative training.

You sort of address combination training as "traditional." Dispite your intended meaning, I think you do something quite intersting with this word. You implicitiy say that method is more valuable than R+ only training. It is traditional/normal/common and there for crediable. I am not saying you can't use that word, but just to follow up on how the langauge we use really constructs idea and feelings that are sometimes outside of our intended meaning.

To address a few points specifically:
I have heard countless stories about how dogs are brought into shelters because of an abusive past and often the dogs are still very friendly to humans. You can not claim a causal relationship between the two and certainly not between +P and aggression.

Perhaps, but you can often find with these dogs they are perfectly "normal" but one particular thing can cause a problem. A dog who spends most of his day in a cage or tied to a tree can then "suddenly" snap when put in a cage or tied to a tree. I think you point to a cuase because you don't know the history. Again, there are heaps of posts here and at DD about people who have adopted GREAT pets but they have one or two problems. Dogs don't just get that way.

I guess, I am just tired of hearing theories stated as facts especially when they are used to argue against something else. People keep saying that using a +R only method is more humane, but for whom? For the dog? Or for you?

Here I am just asking for clarification. You seem to implicitly say +R isn't humane for the dog. Is that your intention?

Renee

04-21-2005, 01:55 AM

I second your post Lorie... great points about how dogs habituate to punishment...

Renee

04-21-2005, 02:40 AM

Hee-

You stated:
"No one specific training method or theory is better than another. "

+P can be a very effective tool, but when we look at the consequences from +P, that is what makes +R the more effective choice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You stated:
"You can not claim a causal relationship between the two and certainly not between +P and aggression. "

I guess I'm not sure what you are basing your information on.... Do you have any studies, references or academic texts to support that aversives do not cause aggression... There is plenty of evidence out there that states otherwise...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You stated:
"I think most times when a dog shows aggression, genetics plays a large part."

What are you basing this on? There are many factors that influcence aggression like learned behavior, genetics, hormones, early experience, stress and fear, resiliency, trauma, physiological factors. While genetics and behavioral conformation certainly can play a role in aggression (this is goes into the calculation when determining abnormal vs normal aggression), stress and fear are the major causes of aggression.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You stated:
"For me, what is most important is having an open mind. I would much rather seek a behaviorist or trainer who is willing to assess my dog and my situation with an open mind and suggest a program that fits our needs, rather than a trainer who is vested into a specific theory."

So are you saying people who use +P are not vested in a specific theory and are "open-minded" because they use +P. Behaviorists will assess your dog based on their education/experince level and will come up with a solution that is benefical to the dog and workable for the human - it certainly doesn't need to include +P to necessarily "fit your needs". It seems like you equate +P being "open-minded"....and you only want advice that fits within that paradigm - even when evidence states otherwise. While I do hope you do decide to continue with this forum, perhaps you might feel more comfortable on another forum that uses aversives in dog training.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You stated:
"I guess, I am just tired of hearing theories stated as facts especially when they are used to argue against something else."

What are you basing your opinions on? Studies? References? Academic Texts? Anecdotes?

Jill Ramsey

04-21-2005, 06:05 AM

Hee & Eric,

:tup: :thumbs_up :clap:

Melissa Brunoehler

04-21-2005, 09:35 AM

Hi Hee~

I already read the story in another post about how the dog was trained using traditional methods and then later reacted aggressively toward his owner. I guess I just think there is more to this story

What else would you like to know about that story? I'd be happy to answer any questions. Another quick example of how aversives cause aggression. A friend of mine adopted a dog. Friend told dog to sit while the dog had his collar & leash on, dog attacked (lunged, growled,snarled-but did not make contact). Friend told dog to sit while dog did not have collar & leash on, dog sat. Coincidence?

I don't think using +P can create aggression simply from the fact that even dogs that have been severely abused (and dear god no one interpret this the wrong way) do not react aggressively.

+p obviously doesn't cause aggression with every dog.

I guess, I am just tired of hearing theories stated as facts especially when they are used to argue against something else.

Yes my two examples were stories, not proven. But there has been research done on +R & +P. There has been a lot of info posted in this thread & over in Philosophy(learing theory thread) which state scientific fact. Which is what I, along with other +R trainers base our training on. If you are truly interested in animal behavior & learning theory I encourage you to read- Excel-Erated Learning by Pamela J. Reid Ph.D.

People keep saying that using a +R only method is more humane, but for whom? For the dog? Or for you?

I'm not sure what you mean?

My point is this. As some have already pointed out, every dog is unique and will respond accordingly to different training methods. No one specific training method or theory is better than another. You can achieve success with many methods.
You can. But maybe you can explain to me why, if +R works you would want to use +P. I want my dogs to listen me when I tell them to do something, not after I give them a leash pop. I think it's sad that people justify +P by saying their dogs are large or that their dogs run into things & it doesn't phase the dog. I'm not sure what any of that has to do with an owner using aversives on a dog?? If someone needs to use aversives to get their dog to listen, maybe they need to take a look at their relationship with their dog.

Anway, if you do use a +R only method, I think that is great, but do not judge others because they also incorporate +P

Some of the former members of DD & certainly the former advisors believe in +R only. If people want to promote +P, there are plenty of other sites to do that on.

Jill Ramsey

04-21-2005, 11:09 AM

I think it's sad that people justify +P by saying their dogs are large or that their dogs run into things & it doesn't phase the dog. I'm not sure what any of that has to do with an owner using aversives on a dog?? If someone needs to use aversives to get their dog to listen, maybe they need to take a look at their relationship with their dog.

Some of the former members of DD & certainly the former advisors believe in +R only. If people want to promote +P, there are plenty of other sites to do that on.
I'm one of the people that used that as kind of an example of what type of pain doesn't seem to faze my dog. No, I don't hit him. But if I did give him a smack, :smack: it would probably hurt his feelings more than him feeling the pain. Or, he would think it's a new game to play. :p

Melissa Brunoehler

04-21-2005, 11:21 AM

Hi Jill~ Good point! Although some aversives may not be overly physically painful to a dog they can still harm the relationship between dog & owner Renee B posted this in Philosophy~ This is from Canine Behavior: A guide for Veterinarians by Bonnie Beaver:

An aversive stimulus can evoke a sympathetic fight-or-flight response such as aggression, fear or submission, and it can interfere with the lesson intended or with the human-dog bond.

I'm one of the people that used that as kind of an example of what type of pain doesn't seem to faze my dog. No, I don't hit him. But if I did give him a smack, :smack: it would probably hurt his feelings more than him feeling the pain. Or, he would think it's a new game to play. :p

Clair Taberner

04-21-2005, 11:35 AM

just a point to ponder......

before all the +r became wider known was there a huge problem with aggressive/problem dogs

Melissa Brunoehler

04-21-2005, 11:40 AM

I think another thing to think about is why there are so many crossover trainers now???
(A cross over trainer is a trainer that once used correction based training but now uses +R.)
just a point to ponder......

before all the +r became wider known was there a huge problem with aggressive/problem dogs

Renee

04-21-2005, 11:41 AM

Clarie-

Dog aggression has always been around. 15+ years ago people were just told euthanize their dogs - even for minor aggression problems. So people either lived with it or put their dogs "to sleep." Behavioral science is a relatively new field 15-20 years old - at least the way we know it. Though it can be argured that many people were doing this stuff more than 20 years ago - it just wasn't widely accepted, researched or understood by the masses. People really started to understand the effectiveness of +R methodology when applied to training marine animals like whales and dolphins and also pigeons. Killer Whale trainers learned that the use of adversives in training might get you killed or at least, launched 20 feet out of the pool.

heathea

04-21-2005, 12:19 PM

Man, I don't click on this thread for 2 days and WHAM! it exploded.
Hello everyone.
Here is my point of view. Hee Yung, you mentioned earlier that you are approx. middle of the road in regards to +R/+P. I would have to say I am right there with you.

I do have a point to make with someone who was discussing leash pops and how they could/might only work for 1 month and then things would have to escalate to get the same reaction. As I have freely admitted earlier, I was trained by a dog trainer approx. 5 years ago to use leash pops. My dogs walk on leash and I very rarely have to tell them not to pull (maybe once). I used to use a leash pop, now I can just use voice commands. I would find that to be the oppisite of escalation. I know that the escalation theory was one you have proposed, I just wanted to show you some non-supporting evidence.

One point is that the kind of person who beats there dog would never come onto this website looking for behavior help as they are fairly sure they are doing what is right and they are not the type of people who would spend that kind of time on their dog. So I commend everyone for spending time looking and writing to make their dogs better.

Another point is that I completely feel for Jarrod, he came onto this site and just expressed his opinion which I don't feel was a wrong opinion, just misinterpreted by others. I feel he is a brave man. He got blasted by other people, something I have never seen before on this site and I think I know why. Back on doggie door there was a collar debate, this was before I had read all the +R stuff and I said, I use choke chains. There were quite a few people who also mentioned they used them after being trained to, but we were a very small very quiet group of people who for lack of a better term were afraid to post our opinions.
I admire people who have the patience and understanding to train a dog by only re-inforcing the good things they do. My god, that would be hard. If my dog were eating the remote/couch/anything else she was eating and I just ignored it and went and got her a biscuit to distract her, then rewarded her when she came; I admire all of you. However, if my dog is eating the couch, I am going to say, loudly, "NO!". the dog will stop, then I give the dog the treat.

I love my dogs, I always will. The dogs I had as a teenager (now deceased due to age) protected me from people breaking into my house; my current dogs protect me from my freaky neighbors; and most of all, my dogs fill a place in mine and my husbands heart. I have been attacked by a dog, and I have re-habilitated an abused, starved and over-fearful dog to the point when he is a fine, portly, little gentleman. I raised my first puppy 2 years ago, whom I rescued from an abusive owner who was feeding them roadkill. That doesn't mean I am not going to tell my dog no when they are doing something inapproprate.

I do not beat or hit my dogs (except in play while fighting with rope, and she is usually whacking herself). I was just agreeing with Jill that my large beast would be able to take things physically that a smaller/less strong dog would not. It doesn't mean I am going to test it, but when she hits herself in the head, it looks awfully hard.

I just wanted to share some thoughts with you all. Thank you for reading.
Take care,
Heather

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 01:25 PM

Wow that was a lot of information, but rather than argue point for point which I think is a useless way to argue/discuss things over the internet, I'll just say a few things in response.

Someone asked about journal articles, etc that proves or provides evidence for the information I provided. Well most of it I think is common sense or purely rational, however, I am not the one claiming something to be true therefore, it is not my burden to provide proof. In academia it is the people who are trying to make a claim that something causes something, that need to provide evidence. That is what the scientific method is all about. Sort of like...innocent until proven guilty. Also, you need to keep in mind, just because one study yielded a certain outcome, does not suddenly make that theory or idea a scientific fact.

There just is no scientific fact that states +P causes aggression.

Someone else asked why have there been so many crossover trainers. My feeling is because it's a great marketing tool. It appeals to the emotions. It's what everyone is into and it would not be very lucrative to go against the current grain of training ideology. If you were reading an advertisement that read: Come train with me, I incorporate aversives and positive punishment into training your dog. Or if you read: Come train with me using the dog training method based on the latest behavioral models. We only train using positive reinforcement witout the use of aversives or any other inhumane, cruel methods or tools. Which trainer do you think the average person would call

So what would +R trainers suggest if they come across a dog that just isn't responding to their method?

I would also like more information on how my relationship is harmed between myself and my dog if I give him a leash pop?

I actually used to support the +R only method, but I realized Bogart needs someone who is more firm with him. He always listened to my boyfriend, but not always to me. I started to do more research on training and came across some excellent articles (just another thing I wanted to add-some people keep suggesting all these books that give great information about +R training, I can also find articles and books that give great information about the proper use of aversives). Anyway, I decided to be more firm with Bogart and guess what, he responds to me very well now. I can say his name with that tone in my voice and he listens.

Establishing a relationship with your dog involves much more than giving him treats for good behavior. Your dog wants to look up to you, he wants to know that you are the leader (and this doesn't mean only the one who dispenses treats), he NEEDS you to be the "pack leader." This can mean that you will need to be firm in making sure he listens to you.

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 01:27 PM

Oh, I also wanted to add that I think Heather made a great post. And also wanted in mention that you can not compare whales, pigeons, etc. to dogs.

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 01:28 PM

One point is that the kind of person who beats there dog would never come onto this website looking for behavior help as they are fairly sure they are doing what is right and they are not the type of people who would spend that kind of time on their dog. So I commend everyone for spending time looking and writing to make their dogs better.

Excellent point. No matter what your training method, we obviously all care deeply about the welfare of our dogs.

Renee

04-21-2005, 01:42 PM

Heather-

Actually its habituation.... and escalation is a consequence of habituation.

Habituation = A decrease in perceptual response to a repeated stimulus.

This is why a stern "no" doesn't work for every dog and why we promote managment, NRM, postive directives etc. Some dogs are very scared by a stern "no" and other dogs could care less. I say this as I just got home from the dog park where a lady was screaming bloody murder at her labs for being exuberant (which they certainly were). All I heard was "NO, NO, NO"...Did her dogs care? NO!(no pun intended...) It really had no effect on them...

Management, NRM and postive directives are successful techniques if properly used and reduce the consequences of fallout.

Renee

04-21-2005, 01:45 PM

Hee--

We can apply learning theory to all animals (even the people who use aversives base it on learning theory). We do take species differences (cognition) into account, but learning theory applies to animals and humans...

Also, I'm not sure why you are making such statements, then removing yourself from the burden of proof....you ask people in here to justify +R, which they spend a lot of time, trouble and effort doing. So I guess that it is only fair that you put in the same amount of time, trouble and effort to explain yourself.

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 01:52 PM

Absolutely Renee, but that doesn't mean that you can compare two different animals...as far as how successful it will be. Dogs are in a completely different environment than a whale.

Also in response to the lady you saw at the park yelling NO. I think that can be either: a lack of training (rather than the method) or simply the level of distraction. Even a dog trained with treats and +R can be too distracted at the park to come.

Clair Taberner

04-21-2005, 02:27 PM

before i say anything else i am not saying anything is right or wrong just joining in and keeping neutral:D

the reason i put my point to ponder is because of a personal experience......

about 25yrs ago lita came to us at around the age of 3yrs old. prior to her being in the shelter she had been a "latch key" dog and severly beaten on a regular basis, not fed she fed herself etc. She attacked anyone who came within a certain proximity and any thing else that so much as looked at her. she had been rehomed several times and returned as a "vicious uncontrolable bitch" and was on death row. we always went for the underdog. she had the kindest eyes. she won a rosette for that in later years bless her.

anyway she came and lived with us. a year on and she was able to be trusted to walk off lead without attacking anyone/thing. was obedient and absolutely lived for titbits and belly rubs. she even sat and took a toddler trying to put a saftey pin in her head which the toddler thought was a hair grip. luckily mum looked round and put a stop to that.

she was "trained" with a choke chain, loud verbal and a newspaper and the occasional boot up the backside (before anyone calls the rspca it was more of a toe nudge than kick). but she was also loved in abundance and given routine. she learnt what was expected of her and what to expect she was an extremly happy dog who would even "grin" in greeting and play. she lived right into her 17th year when sadly arthritus got the better of her.

i really do think that the method of training needs to be tailored to the individual dog's character. but also feel that +r is the best to go with when advising training as there is no way it can be taken out of context by someone who has their very first dog:)

Melissa Brunoehler

04-21-2005, 03:02 PM

Hi Hee~

Someone else asked why have there been so many crossover trainers. My feeling is because it's a great marketing tool. It appeals to the emotions. It's what everyone is into and it would not be very lucrative to go against the current grain of training ideology.

Well if that’s the only reason then I don’t think they were very good trainers to begin with. If correction based training was in vogue I certainly wouldn’t switch over to it. There is not really any point in arguing this b/c no one can prove why a trainer crossed over. But here are some crossover’s reflections on how/why they crossed over.

http://www.clickersolutions .com/articles/2002b/reflections.htm

http://www.clickerlessons.c om/crossover.html

http://r-plusdogtraining.info/train.htm

http://premier-pet.com/philosophy/

If you were reading an advertisement that read: Come train with me, I incorporate aversives and positive punishment into training your dog. Or if you read: Come train with me using the dog training method based on the latest behavioral models. We only train using positive reinforcement witout the use of aversives or any other inhumane, cruel methods or tools. Which trainer do you think the average person would call

I guess it depends on the way the person likes to train their dogs.

So what would +R trainers suggest if they come across a dog that just isn't responding to their method?

This ? is too vague. Who trained the dog? When isn't the dog responding? Is he never responding or is having a problem with a specific cue? When/how was the dog acquired?

I actually used to support the +R only method, but I realized Bogart needs someone who is more firm with him. He always listened to my boyfriend, but not always to me. I started to do more research on training and came across some excellent articles (just another thing I wanted to add-some people keep suggesting all these books that give great information about +R training, I can also find articles and books that give great information about the proper use of aversives).

The book I mentioned is definitely not one sided towards +R, there is a lot of info on +P in the book.

Anyway, I decided to be more firm with Bogart and guess what, he responds to me very well now. I can say his name with that tone in my voice and he listens.
I’m confused Why do you have to give him leash pops then?
How did you learn about +R? Did you take Bogart to +R classes? Did you read training books?

Establishing a relationship with your dog involves much more than giving him treats for good behavior.
Of course, I don’t know who would think it was only based on cookies.

Your dog wants to look up to you, he wants to know that you are the leader (and this doesn't mean only the one who dispenses treats), he NEEDS you to be the "pack leader."

+R people don’t just go around handing out cookies. We have rules, we set boundaries, we use NILIF. We don't just let our dogs do anything they want.

This can mean that you will need to be firm in making sure he listens to you.

Like I said before I want my dogs & the dogs I work with to listen when I tell them to do something; not listen after they receive a leash pop
__________________

Lauren Frisbie

04-21-2005, 03:34 PM

Ok, this may sound stupid, but what exactly is a leash pop? I've never heard of this before. Is it like popping the dog with the end that you hold with your hand or is it quickly jerking on the leash? I don't use either, but I was just wondering,

heathea

04-21-2005, 03:38 PM

Okay, 'nother random thought...

While in a dog pack, aren't dogs that were not behaving properly or puppies given +P? A dog raising her pups certainly does not use +R. Has anyone thought this may be where +P has come from? Any ideas, etc.

Heather

aussiesmum

04-21-2005, 03:42 PM

I dunno, but I also didn't lick my dog clean or kill meat and feed it to her either. Oh, and I also don't wrestle my dog to the ground and bite her until she submits.

See, sometimes that whole "in the wild/dog pack" idea doesn't really cross over.

heathea

04-21-2005, 03:42 PM

Not a stupid question.
A leash pop to me (how I was trained along with my dogs) is when my dogs are on leash with a choke chain in a loose position (not in anyway tight). When the dog does not respond or pulls on the leash, the person holding the leash (me) quickly pulls upward approx. 1-2 inches so that the chain makes a noise but does not tighten around the dog(s)' neck past the point of a regular collar at the same time, I would tell the dog, "No, don't pull". I can now say, No, don't pull and they slow down, or heel and they walk next to me. I either got very lucky with 2 very different dogs, or my dogs learned the commands very well, or both.
:)

Lauren Frisbie

04-21-2005, 03:44 PM

Oh, so can a leash pop still be considered a leash pop without a chocke chain? Thanks,

heathea

04-21-2005, 03:49 PM

:D
"Oh, and I also don't wrestle my dog to the ground and be her until she submits."

-actually they have shown this to be completely untrue. A pack leader NEVER squables or lowers themselves to quibble with others. It is a very interesting article, you should look it up. Some dogs are natural leaders, the way some people are natural leaders. It just proves how very ineffectual an alpha roll actually is, you are just showing the dog leadership is up for grabs.

"but I also didn't lick my dog clean or kill meat and feed it to her either."

-I understand what you are saying, however I just read a post a few days ago how many people wipe their dogs butts with baby wipes after they go the bathroom as well as give baths and I just brought home some raw bones for my dogs last night which they ate with abandon. I don't know, I am pretty sure my dogs think I am a really bad hunter spending every day out there and only getting stuff once in a while. :D

Jarrod Stafford

04-21-2005, 03:55 PM

I quote this from one of the links you posted about cross-over trainers because I think it precisely shows the logic in which people should use in training any dog.

I find, as you do Matt, that I learn from ALL good trainers, no matter what methodology they use. I may choose not to use some of the tools they use, nor use tools in quite the same way, but that doesn't negate the information they have to share in many areas. I take what I can use, I let the rest go, and I thank that trainer for sharing his/her experience and knowledge with me. Every good trainer has something to teach me, and for that something taught, I am oh-so-grateful.

If I were to close my mind and my heart to those who train differently than me, it would be MY loss. I always remember that not long ago, I was one of "them."

Debi Davis
scripto@azstarnet.co m
copyright 2001 Debi Davis

heathea

04-21-2005, 03:58 PM

Oh, so can a leash pop still be considered a leash pop without a chocke chain? Thanks,
I don't know, I think so, I used to have the martingale-type collars. What I was looking for was the noise, not pain or discomfort for the dog. Maybe my training was different than others, who knows. I would think even if you quickly pulled on a flat buckle collar it could be considered a leash pop.
Keep in mind, these are my opinions, they hold no validity to anyone but me. :)

aussiesmum

04-21-2005, 03:58 PM

heathea

04-21-2005, 03:59 PM

I quote this from one of the links you posted about cross-over trainers because I think it precisely shows the logic in which people should use in training any dog.

This was a great cut and paste from an article, however you might want to re-think the green color, it was difficult to read.

Jarrod Stafford

04-21-2005, 04:02 PM

I was changing the color probably at the same time you were saying that Heather :rofl: I was like eek! my eyes!

heathea

04-21-2005, 04:07 PM

actually they have shown this to be completely untrue. A pack leader NEVER squables or lowers themselves to quibble with others. It is a very interesting article, you should look it up. Some dogs are natural leaders, the way some people are natural leaders. It just proves how very ineffectual an alpha roll actually is, you are just showing the dog leadership is up for grabs.

Doesn't this then prove that we should be benign leaders to our dogs (simular to then a NILIF idea)?

[sorry about the over sarcaism in my previous post, couldn't help it ;)]

I use NILIF on a daily basis, I feel that is a critical training tool. +R is also a great tool. I just feel +P is also a usable tool that shouldn't be completely dismissed but also should not be the only training. Every training device or philosophy is a tool, it all depends on the tool user as to the effectivness.

I don't know if benign leader is what I would call a pack leader. Just because the pack leader doesn't quibble with the dog in a blow by blow fight for the top of the alpha roll, doesn't mean it doesn't snap at an un-ruly pup or dog trying to get to it's food.

I am sorry you couldn't help yourself with the sarcasm, I try not to be sarcastic on these posts as that is a hard thing to convey. I thought I made fairly good parallels to the similarities of how people treat their dogs with the cleaning and so forth. :)

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 05:53 PM

Like I said before, it is useless to argue point for point. We could continue quoting each other and making our rebuttals, but this could go on forever. I have better things to do and honestly I have absolutely no desire to convince anyone that they should use my method of dog training. After having read the last part of Clair's post, I realized that she hit it on the nail, and that I may not have been entirely clear about my message or perhaps I took the wrong approach, and for that I will apologize. I am not trying to sway anyone on this forum to use +P in their dog training, I am simply defending my choice in incorporating +P and possibly why other people do so as well. I do not like to be told or criticized for the way I train my dog, especially when we are dealing with theoreticals and personal opinion. Dog training is not a perfect science. There will never be one best way to train a dog.

I don't want to participate in this thread anymore. The love we have for our dogs is what should bring us together, not the way we train our dogs. I think this thread has the potential to divide many of us and because this is a relatively small forum, I don't think it will benefit anyone. To be quite honest though-when I first registered at doggiebag, I had no idea it was a +R only forum. I thought it was a general forum for dog lovers.

A lot of questions were asked about +P, additionally, comments were made. I don't have the energy, the time, nor the desire to refute each one. I am going to post some articles and if you want answers or are curious, I think you will find the information within one of these articles. I posted these on another thread, but here they are again. If you would like even more information, someone posted a thread titled "cute website" which has a link to book reviews. Within these reviews, she discusses training methods.

http://www.kateconnick.com/library/millerpositive.html
http://www.kateconnick.com/library/boothpurelypositive. html
etc...

http://www3.sympatico.ca/tsuro/_articles/real_training.html
http://www.flyingdogpress.c om/pposa.html
http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/dog/LA/koutsky.htm
http://www.knowingdogs.com/a4_bottom.htm
http://www.dogpro.org/articles_detail.cfm? ID=8

Hee Yung Lee

04-21-2005, 05:57 PM

Oh sorry, one last thing...I do not use alpha rolls or support them! Someone mentioned them and I just wanted to make it clear that just because someone does use or support the use of +P, it doesn't mean they use all forms of it.

Amber

04-21-2005, 09:49 PM

Yes, you can use leash pops with any type of collar. If you tug on the leash enough, any collar will at least move on the dog's neck and they will get the point you are trying to convey, if that is the way they were trained. My dogs would have no idea what a leash pop would mean if I did one right now because I have not trained them in that manner.

Lauren Frisbie

04-21-2005, 11:20 PM

Oh ok, I don't use anything but +R, but I was just wondering what exactly a leash pop was because everyone was using the term. Thanks for your help Amber,

Daniela Jantzen

04-22-2005, 03:25 AM

There just is no scientific fact that states +P causes aggression.

Matter of factly, there are a lot of proven cases. ;)
Especially when +p is misused excessively.
A quite famous case in the wolf world is wolf #40 in the Druid pack at the Yellowstone National Park. This alpha female suffered from something you might want to call a control complex - whoever misbehaved in her eyes, got punished by her. In the end it was a pretty nasty tyranny which was ended by mutiny - she was killed by her own pack.
My point is: +P CAN lead to aggression and it does over and over again, all over the world - for the simple fact that punishment only supresses behaviour. Supression can lead to frustration. And frustration very quickly to aggression......
Of course, it does not have to do so all the time! But it does in way too many cases to justify +P.

So what would +R trainers suggest if they come across a dog that just isn't responding to their method?

The job of each trainer or handler should be to find the perfect motivation for each dog. Motivation = something the dog would die for and is more than willing to work for.
If you seem to get nowhere, you are usually using the wrong motivation.

I would also like more information on how my relationship is harmed between myself and my dog if I give him a leash pop?

Ok, now let us look at leash pops a little closer, alright?
Leash pops are usually used when dogs pull. Now imagine Fido is walking along, pulling towards an interesting spot. All of a sudden the owner jerks the leash and Fido slows down (this is called an escape reaction - the animal trys to flee the aversive stimulus) . Great!?
Unfortunately, Fido quite did not understand WHY the leash was popped and will sure pull forward again. The whole scenario will occur over and over again.
Now imagine Fido's frustration if he just doesn't understand the reason behind it and how to avoid this aversive stimulus in the first place?
And here we go again, frustration kicks in.
Depending on the individual character of the dog, it will either
a) not care at all and ignore the leash pops
b) slow down,trying to escape the stimulus like that
c) shut down
d) associate the frustration of the leash pops with whatever things it sees and experiences whenever it feels one.
I assume from your description that Bogart is a dog of character b). If you reward him for loose leash walk then, he might eventually get the message and obey your wishes.
What would you have done if he was of character a), c) or d)?
Yes, +P CAN be helpful and work. But it contains a pretty high risk of ruining a dog. Why even use it then if there are other methods available?

I actually used to support the +R only method, but I realized Bogart needs someone who is more firm with him.

When you mean consequent when you mean firm, then yes, I am right with you. If you mean harsh, then I am not.

Establishing a relationship with your dog involves much more than giving him treats for good behavior. Your dog wants to look up to you, he wants to know that you are the leader (and this doesn't mean only the one who dispenses treats), he NEEDS you to be the "pack leader." This can mean that you will need to be firm in making sure he listens to you.
If you replace firm with consequent and predictable, then I am with you on that part! :)

Daniela Jantzen

04-22-2005, 03:28 AM

Excellent point. No matter what your training method, we obviously all care deeply about the welfare of our dogs.

Bingo.
And with that point made, could someone please get back to the initial question of the post and suggest what someone could do if he/she observes a case of "real" animal abuse?
I suggested contacting the local humane society, but with me being from Germany I might be wrong there and it would be really interesting to know what one can do in such cases.
Thanks!

Danny

Hee Yung Lee

04-22-2005, 09:29 AM

Danny,

If you had read any of the articles I posted, it wouldn't have been necessary to have taken the time to quote and reply to some things I wrote. Everything that you responded with is directly addressed within these articles. I will/have taken the time and read the articles posted on this forum, and will actually take a look at the book Excel-rated Learning (with an open mind). I am just curious, will you do the same thing with the articles I linked to?

The only fact that there is in this discussion is that I will continue to insist that the use of +P (according to learning theory) will not cause aggression in majority of dogs IF used properly. Yes, abusing your dog probably has the potential to create serious issues, but +P used according to the principles of learning theory within a program based on positive reinforcement, most likely will not.

Again, I am not encourgaing or even suggesting everyone should use +P in their training.

In reply to the original question, I do believe calling the humane society is what she should do. I'm not positive, but it's probably what I would do.

Renee

04-22-2005, 10:10 AM

Hee-

As far as the Suzanne Clothier article is concerned, I'm not sure if she still subscribes to the idea that you should be staring at your dog with "hard" eyes anymore...I don't think anyone does anymore. We want to teach our dogs that it is a good thing to "watch" us. That way they defer to us for all decision making - especially when we approach other dogs on the street. Suzanne is a behavior consultant and adheres to the LIMA approach to consulting (least invasive minimally aversive). Also - did you happen to read the Suzanne's article where she talks about not using a physical correction to force your dog to obey you.....

I would encourage you purchase some reputable texts in you quest for dog training knowledge. When you pull articles off the internet (on any topic, not just dogs) you have to have a critical eye and base of foundation of knowlege to find the merit and mistakes within them. Which my critical eye does find some merit and certainly some undereducation in those articles you have posted.

Hee Yung Lee

04-22-2005, 10:38 AM

Renee,

The authors of those articles have years of experience in dog training. It is my understanding that you are a student and not a professional dog trainer. The articles give excellent information and anecdotes. While your critical eye finds undereducation, my critical eye finds rational ideas about dog training, a willingness to not close ones mind to other ideas, informative personal anecdotes, years of experience training dogs, and a desire not to preach what is right and what is wrong.

I will state this one last time. I am not interested in proving you are incorrect in your training approach. I really don't think you are. I am simply giving informaion that says, hey, you're not going to ruin your dog's life because you use +P. Some parrallels can be made between dog training and child rearing. Some parents will spank their children, some do not (apparently I was spanked as a child, of course I don't remember this, but my parents have told me). There are a thousand books out there about raising your child, but you know what? The majority of children grow up to be civilized, rational adults regardless of the specific way you reared them. I think the same think can be said of dog training.

You do not have to use +P and you certainly do not need to criticize others who do. I know this is a +R only dog forum and that is why I will not participate in the dog training, defensive dogs, etc sections. I do feel you, Melissa, and the others give excellent advice and most times it is exactly the same thing I would do.

OK, I am really done now with this thread. ;)

Melissa Brunoehler

04-22-2005, 11:53 AM

Hi Jarrod~

I agree. I hope that I do not come off as someone that is not open to other people or their ideas that has not been my intention when I post about +R.
Although not using +P is very important to me it is not my desire to make a person feel guilty about how they interact with their dogs. There are always going to people that use +P and to force my ideas on them will not help the person or their dog. It is my hope to teach people to teach their dogs in a positive way.
(PS your quote is one of my favorite Dog Quotes.)

Hee~ In a way we are very far in our ideas- you occasionally use +P; I never use +P. It is obvious that you are not going to post that we have changed your mind & you will never use +P again. Nor will we say that you have convinced us to start using & teaching +P. I think as an advisor I should have stayed out of this thread and focused on advising. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), I have never been very good at not expressing my opinion when I have one ;) Anyway, back to my original point, although we disagree on +P - I think there is a lot more that we agree on.

I quote this from one of the links you posted about cross-over trainers because I think it precisely shows the logic in which people should use in training any dog.

Renee

04-22-2005, 06:07 PM

Back to the original question in this post.....

Here the humane society will not respond to animal abuse cases....it is not their job and they have no jurisdiction over it. Here we have to call the non-emergency line for the Police and then, they radio the call out to Animal Control.

So I would try that avenue first...

Krista Winegardener

04-22-2005, 11:02 PM

If anyone is concerned about a dog or dogs in their own neighborhood,my advice would be to know your local animal control officer.These people have more experience than most of us in judging whether a dog is actually in jeopardy.Find out who is your animal control officer,and in the situation mentioned in the original post,tell them that you suspect possible abuse of a
dog in your neighborhood and may need to call back in future with more details and would appreciate any advice they could give.Keep it brief and to the point and try to get a feel for what your local animal control is like.I say this because we are lucky here that our local animal control officer is a very honest,decent guy who has seen it all and heard it all.He will tell you point blank what the options are if it turns out to be a case of serious abuse.You can then decide if you want to pursue it.He knows that the options are either taking the dog to the pound,which he considers a last resort or an emergency option as this pound is overwhelmed and not a place YOU would want to put your dog.There,the dog will be assessed for adoption and given some time before being euthanized,or if it fails the assessment,it will be euthanized.He prefers to work out a solution with the owners whenever this is possible and whenever the dog's life isn't in immediate danger.He has the experience and the know how to talk to people who are reported.He is excellent as the first port of call and can help you to clarify your thoughts about a particular case.

I think it's important to get a feel for the culture of your local animal control.If they are as dedicated and decent as ours is,you have a great resource.At any rate,knowing what the options are for a seized dog might help you to decide if the situation is so dire that it requires immediate action.