Here-here regarding Suzanne Clothier!

Pat,

Yes, ground work is also important. As is the relationship between horse and rider, onboard or not.

Most horse people understand this a little better because they are in actual physical contact with the horse.

Just a small added point of clarification - training a horse includes (or should include) a significant component of what is called “groundwork” where the trainer is on the ground rather than on the horse and working with the horse that way. This needs to be understood as part of the discussion rather than just the work a trainer does while on the back of a horse.

I have extremely mixed feelings. Some of his techniques have proven to be, in practice, extremely effective. Small physical corrections provided by a hand or a foot (NOT a kick, before someone jumps on me… ;O) to redirect the dog and allow you the opportunity to replace the behaviour with something more suitable.

Personally, in my training kit I have a giant bag of treats of all sorts, a lupi harness, a check chain, a prong collar, several clickers and 6’, 20’ and 50’ leads.

We train behaviours (generally the more complex behaviours, such as heel, eye focus, directed movement, etc. with a clicker. It’s quicker, the dog understands faster, and it’s no stress. Simple behaviours like sit, down, leave it, stay, etc. we use luring and positive reinforcement.

Once a dog has become reliable (and we always set them up for success whenever possible) we employ aversives for proofing. We also employ aversives for “meathead” dogs. Dogs like labs, shepherds, hounds, some terriers, etc., who have come to us a bit later in life and have out of control behaviours. It’s difficult to train a dog with two hours of pent up energy inside him… but it’s also impossible to walk a medium-large dog effectively for two hours without first training the dog how to walk nicely on a lead, correct? So, we employ a lupi or a prong collar, depending on the personality of the dog, which immediately removes the frustration from the walk.

Then, once the dog is tired, we are better able to focus on problem behaviours. We also use aversives to prevent potentially harmful behaviours. We proof “leave it” “come” and “off” using aversives because a dog who eats potentially dangerous items on the ground, or a dog who runs out into traffic when he slips his collar, or a dog who jumps up on grandma and breaks her hip are all dogs who could end up with serious injuries - or seriously injuring others and earning an ill-deserved reputation.

My point is that while I would NEVER condone hanging a dog (and for the record, that Jindo was NOT on a prong, it was on a slip collar - regardless, hanging a dog on a prong is completely inappropriate and cruel and just lends credence to those trainers who consider the tool barbaric. When used properly, only mild discomfort should be experienced, and then only when the dog chooses to apply pressure to the lead) he does have some basic ideologies that are sound.

And I feel that way about most trainers! I won’t drink the kool-aid, but I will listen intently, try methods that common sense says have a good chance of being effective, and make my decision from there. I take what works, discard what doesn’t, and apply what I feel is the appropriate technique to the appropriate dog.

It should also be noted that there are some PP trainers who will never be successful using corrections. They simply lack the conviction to provide a meaningful, convincing correction to the dog, and the dog learns to ignore the aversive - potentially escalating the behaviour in the meantime.

There are aversive trainers who will NEVER be able to use a clicker properly. They don’t possess that form of timing - after years of timing corrections, learning to time a cue for positive behaviour is a challenge for some, impossible for others. Particularly when they enter into the trial with the idea that it won’t work.

What is truly required is an open-minded approach from both sides. We all do this for the same reasons (or at least, I certainly hope this is the case). We enjoy our students, and we want to see them succeed, see them become responsible doggy members of society, trustworthy and well-behaved. So far I think Suzanne Clothier has come the closest to this ideal (although there are many trainers/behaviourists I would put ahead of her in terms of significant contributions to the world of training and behaviour modification) and I think it’s time we ALL open our minds a bit.

It’s not an all-or-nothing deal. I think THAT is what is missing in the training world right now. We’ve become SO polarized… and both sides are equally to blame.

After having to squeegie the anti-Cesar venom off my computer screen which was left by the last “positive only” zealot I had the pleasure of chatting with…

This is for the rational:

I think some of the best who successfully achieve great results with dogs, maintain both an open mind and a tool kit which will put the needs of the dog and owner, first.

The methods and philosophies should be flexible and may change depending upon what you are trying to acheive with a given dog within a given moment, and overall. It’s more than just “no one size fits all”. It’s “no one size fits every situation, with every dog, all of the time”.

For teaching tricks, tasks, and specific behaviors and for performance such as agility, why wouldn’t you use mostly the Positive Reinforcement quadrant of Operant Conditioning?

For obedience, results have shown clearly, all four quadrants are more suitable for proofing.

For Counter Conditioning with truly fearful dogs (not mis-labeled aggressive dogs), Classical Conditioning is invaluable.

In social situations, where humans and dogs must live with each other in harmony and society as a whole in safety, there is something Cesar is offering which may have to actually be felt and experienced in order to be understood.

Once you actually experience what your posture, demeanor, attitude, body language, eye contact, vocal tone, focus, intensity, intent…yes, your “energy” is actually communicating about both the environment and yourself to the dog, you will be close to “getting-it”.

Social animals send each other both deliberate and more subtle signals all of the time. It’s the study of the Social Learning (and not just Bandura’s theory) component which is what’s missing from many a trainer’s toolkit. Although, many of them feel there’s something going on which they are using, but not clearly defining.

Most horse people understand this a little better because they are in actual physical contact with the horse.

This is something I actually see and feel when I’m with a dog. Every interaction between myself and that dog is:

On one hand, describing the relationship “who is who” and “where do I fit in”, which determine’s leadership/followership and the action/reaction sequence in the direction of activities.

And on the other hand, communicating information about the environment such as friends, foes, danger, or food sources.

There is indeed more than meets the eye which needs to be studied on a more scientific level.

But for now, whenever I am with a dog, trying to understand it’s behavior and what it’s thinking, Operant Conditioning and Classical Conditioning will also include Social Learning.

Makes sense to me. Dogs in the real world don’t live alone inside of boxes.

Your “energy” matters.

My thoughts are with you, Gina.

http://www.shirleychong.com/ke.....alming.txt

And dogs do them far, far better than human beings ever can!

Regularly readers know that I’m losing my father right now — he’s coming home from the hospital this week after all the home hospice arrangements are set — and that has made me just a tad (OK, more than a tad) emotionally unstable lately.

Last night I actually called Christie from outside my dad’s hospital room because I was reading the blog there (dad was asleep) and got worked up over a comment. Christie (quite sensibly) pointed out that it was sort of a redirected aggression on my part and to just let it go.

And of course, she was right. Because the thing about the REALLY HOT discussions here is that over the course of them you see people starting to focus not on differences but on commonalities, not on problems and barriers but on solutions.

Sure, there will always be differences, and no, we’re not going to solve everything. But I love how people listen, think and try.

I can’t tell you how great that makes me feel, to have so caring, thoughtful people working so hard to help others.

Anyway … that’s all I have for tonight. I’m going to feed all the critters and then drop in on the chat. Hope to see some of you there.