p.s. Cressida refers to "it" the defintion, not "it" the dog or the training. Emotional state of the person is not typically included in the definition. When I teach about punishment I refer to emotion as a danger sign only. If you attempt to 'punish' while angry you are at risk of 'abusing' instead.

Indeed. Most defintions of punishment make no reference to whether or not it is emotional neutral. A small group of people cannot just decide to redefine a word, at least not without having a very negative effect on our ability to communicate.

I think punishment is something we do to try and stop a behaviour. This aligns pretty well with the most common lay and scientific uses of the word. I would use a more precise term in my research and when talking to others in my discipline, but not when speaking 'normal English' to a mixed group.

Cressida, in Real Life, though, the emotional state of the human has a huge impact on the dog. No, it doesn't trump everything--if you cause serious pain or injury, for instance, the dog is not going to be much affected by the fact that you did it calmly and with the best intentions.

But, as a Supreme Court justice said in one decision, "Even a dog knows the difference between being kicked and being tripped over." More immediately relevant, saying "Ah-ah!" to my dog when she heads for the cat food doesn't have the same impact on her that screaming with rage at her would, or giving her a hard whack on the nose. Using the same word to describe those very different things is, at best, not helpful.

Insisting on using words in a way that contradicts normal human experience, and further insisting that that's the _only_ correct use of the words, does not illuminate, it does not inform, and it does not advance the cause of people communicating with their dogs effectively.

I'm really only posting to say YEAH! New Captcha text! Currently too hard to differentiate case or if it is a "1" or an "l" without context. Thank you!

But while I'm hear, I think the major trouble is people forget dogs are a different species, period. Somehow after they get in the house and are fed and cared for we seem to expect "gratitude" from them, and for it to be expressed in their behavior - like never eating your shoes.

I saw a perfect cartoon once which pointed this out. The balloon over the dog's head was "yak yak yak yak yak Buddy yak yak yak yak yak Buddy yak yak yak......

Those definitions of "punishment" and "correction" are totally arbitrary and don't match up with the actual scientific definition of "punishment".

In the science of animal behavior modification and learning, a punishment is anything that makes a behavior less likely to be performed again in the future. The emotional state of the trainer has nothing at all to do with it.

Adopted, Go back ands re-read the comments. I was responding to the people who said they smack their dogs, not an actual training method.

Punishment - Not emotionally neutral, can occur long after the fact, doled out arbitrarily

Correction - Emotionally neutral (part of ordinary obedience training), consistent, firm and fair

The Monks of New Skete dedicate 2 chapters in "How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend" to discipline and praise.

I am also confused. Punishment has a defined, objective meaning in operant psychology. As far as I know correction and discipline are not scientific terms with precise accepted meanings. I am also not sure what purpose drawing the distinction in the guidelines would achieve? I think they mean what they say about punishment as it is typically defined.

Sorry if I sound stupid for asking, but what *is* the difference between a correction and a punishment? My working understanding of punishment is something that decreases the likelihood of a behavior recurring. So how is this different than "correction" other than "correction" sounds nicer?

I'm not anti-punishment. I have used negative punishment extremely effectively. I have used positive punishment at times. I've also learned that there are other options. I've learned to think outside the box. And I think that it's made me a better dog-owner and a better dog-trainer.

I agree that punishment can be used effectively, but I don't think that most dog owners do so. I think they nag. A lot. And then the dog learns to tune out the punishment. Most people, me included, don't have the stomach to apply positive punishment to the extent that it needs to be used in order to be truly effective. Most people, me included, don't have the excellent timing that is required. And many people don't take into account all of the negative fall-out that can occur, whether the punishment is effective or not.

"To label me as a cookie pushing, gushing, softie because I use positive methods is pretty funny if it weren't so sad."

And to label those who prefer the methods of Koehler or the Monks of New Skete as people who "smack their dogs" instead of training them is just sad an offensive. I don't find it funny at all.
It makes it seem as though you don't understand their methods, much like you claim people don't grasp + training. Although you are a trainer and it seems hard to believe that you would not know what the methods are all about.
My dogs were trained the Monk's way. They were never smacked or alpha-rolled, they are given plenty of praise and rewards and they are happy dogs with great working attitudes. You should hear the tails thump when the training collars come out and it's time for "puppy school."

Until this statement rewritten to differentiate between discipline, corrections and punishment and gives a realistic view of the pros and cons of both training approaches (instead of the fear mongering it currently includes) prior to making a recommendation, I do not agree with it. The intent was good, but the execution is very poor.

Marie, I think you made you point very well and I agree with you.

I am not a trainer, but I have a dog. And though she's quite easy to keep on track, she has her moments. Your posts reminded me to stay focused on behavior modification and what she and I can do as a team versus complicating her issues further with negative reactions. So, thanks for that! ;)

Jumping in late here: I'm happy to see the guidelines published, but probably for the wrong reasons. As you pointed out in your blog, most dog owners are clueless about dogs. They don't understand the difference between discipline, correction and punishment. They watch Cesar and don't actually understand what he is doing. They've heard about Koehler and, even if they've read him, they don't seem to be able to understand the method. (I can say this because I'm on a Koehler list where newbies read his book and ask questions that show lack of understanding, if not illiteracy.)
So most people should use purely positive training, even though most dogs wind up not being trained. Not every pet owner has the patience and stamina of a dog trainer.
And never offer a Chow Chow a cookie.

Stacy, I think you misunderstood my post. (re-squirrels) Or maybe I am missing something. I was trying to make a point to someone else (I think) and I did a poor job with my example. (I'm going to blame my pain meds. Note to self don't post when taking them ever again.) Though using a ball can be used as redirecting attention after a counterconditioning program has been implemented. (or as a reward for ignoring the small fluffy distraction)

My point was that you do need to work on the issue, not just jerk the dog around. That isn't what I would call working on the problem appropriately. (jerking is a great way to cause more aggression however used improperly)

I hope that makes it more clear.

I think I am done with this topic. It seems that there are two camps here where there should be one, the welfare of the dogs. I think we all agree that we love our dogs and don't want to hurt them. (I hope)

It would seem that many people think positive training is nothing but cookie pushing and no discipline. That couldn't be further from the truth. I live with 3 very different dogs that have all responded well with the positve reinforcement training and the no nonsense rules all of my dogs are required to live by. (past included) No darting through doors, come when you are called, no jumping on people and stay means stay are just a few of those. Food rewards aren't used every day either. To label me as a cookie pushing, gushing, softie because I use positive methods is pretty funny if it weren't so sad. Sad because it makes people think the extreme opposite is preferable to "that" type of trainer. Forget about the fact that positive training yields great results and can be used on dogs AND puppies without causing fear. (I've even trained a cat to jump through a hoop on command. Not a useful trick per say but it was alot of fun for all involved.)

I guess I don't understand why people resist learning about positive methods of training whenever it is brought up. "Well I smack my dogs and they do just fine" seems pretty counter intuitive to training to me. If that works for you fine. Just don't expect people to agree with you that have the learning behind their experience that says different. I'm sure I've used this analogy before but here it is again: I own a car but that doesn't make me a mechanic, so if my car is broke and I want it fixed the right way I'll find one, not ask my neighbor for help. (Duct tape will only take you so far.)

I say this out of some fustration and as a person (who makes a living as a dog trainer) simply trying to share some actual knowledge on the subject. It may be that I suck at making my points. (I try hard to make myself clear and can see I have failed miserably in some instances) If I can reach one person to reconsider the antiquated methods out there, it will have been worth at least some of the fustration. I know I don't know everything when it comes to training and behavior, none of us do, tho I can say with some confidence that I DO know more than the average dog owner. Even ones that watch CM. By way of seminars and keeping current with LOTS of great reading on the subject. (aside from my experience in the field) I wish it didn't feel like a battle every time the subject comes up. I'm not sure why that happens. For some reason both sides feel the need to defend their way perhaps.

I know this post may make me look like a total jerk. Obviously not my intention. It is just difficult to read about people smacking their dogs in the name of training and not say anything about it. That which does not vent explodes after all. (perhaps this is my explosion) I will try to ignore future training discussions. It will be hard and I guarantee nothing. :-) I am very passionate about the subject after all, as are most trainers. It is how we are "wired" I think. Tail wags.

I would like to suggest a blog post on 'gushing'. Previously I took my dog to a varsity teaching hospital. One after the other the vets (2) and students (4 in all) gushed at my dog like he was a precocious infant. Actually he is a somewhat anxious border collie cross who benefits from an business-like approach. One of the student encourage my dog to jump up, a vice I labor long and hard to suppress. One of the vets encouraged my dog to lick her on the face while she was talking. I was actively disgusted. The fact he turned out to have ring worm was icing on the cake.

Warmth is nice but I do not want to watch a vet baby-talk and french my dog. Please.

LOL

According to somebody that posted a reply here, I'm not supposed to desensitize or actually work through the problem, I'm supposed to do something else instead. What was the example used..oh yeah, the squirrel thing. I'm not supposed to teach my dogs that little grey furry creatures are not to be barked at or chased, we're supposed to play ball instead. How does that fix anything? IMO, that's just as silly as standing around waiting for a dog to stop jumping on me because he / she is excited.

In the end, I see that I'm not such a demon for making dogs sit and actually practice good manners which was my whole point to begin with. Cutting nails, playing with toes, giving baths do not hurt a dog, but some people allow biting, screaming and other behaviors because heaven forbid they should actually do something about it.

I'm not going to get lured into a arguement about what Cesar thinks about women. There are plenty of examples of men that loved to treat women badly that were proven to do so, versus just what a person thinks he does. JFK is a perfect example, but according to some, he is was the greatest man to ever step foot on this planet. Sure he was....

I'm confused about the gushing bit as well. I certainly don't gush at my dogs. I'm all about the life rewards. They set politely, they get leashed to go. They sit politely, they get unleashed. They wait politely, they get into the car. They wait politely, they get out of the car. Etc etc and on and on. All of those things are rewarding to my dogs, just in and of themselves. No extra reward needed. No cookie-waving necessary.

If my dog screamed her head off having her nails cut, I'd certainly make an effort to teach her to accept it better through desensitizing and teaching her that it's not the huge deal she's making it out to be. *shrug* Less stress for her is less stress for me. I'm not into power struggles.

I think I know why my comment wasn't posting - what I wrote was "Does anyone find Ceasar to be a bit of a s * xist....and I think the s * x was freaking out the spambots. So, I deleted it and said "issues with women"......which, I think he has. ;)

Making a dog yelp because you physically hurt it, is far different than a vocal protest to something you know isn't causing physical pain.

So is verbal praise considering gushing? "Yes! Good dog." in a happy tone is my normal verbal praise. To me gushing is a great way to overstimulate a dog. Not what we are going for with praise.

How did gushing get into this discussion? I think there are way to many wrong impressions of what positive training really is. It is to bad. Consider that drug dogs and search dogs are trained using positive method training. You can't force a dog to do scent work! Knowing how dogs learn is a must in those fields. Food for thought.

While CM isn't my favorite by way of his methods, I do agree of some of what he says. Dogs aren't people in fur coats, they need exercise, discipline and love. But some of his techniques leave alot to be desired in my opinion.

If you are going to use those methods, the Monks of New Skete are at least more fair in their use. I disagree with some of their assessments of they why of the dogs behavior, but they do know how to implement that type of training more fairly than CM does.

Personally I love the shows "Barking Mad" and "It's me or the dog" far far better. To bad they aren't on as often.

emily: New Captcha on its way soon!

I admit I wasn;t paying enough attention to be 100% sure but it didn;t leave a great impression and wasn;t clarified. So I amy have leaped to yee old conclusion. Sorry I am not sure of the epidsode. Maybe someone else here will know it?

(now trying my fifth image)

"The dog was jumping up while being leashed and he touched it in some way that made it yelp and jerk away."

You're assuming the dog was hit. I'd like to see this espiside myself to see if a strike was actually delivered. So you remeber what it was called?

My mother's Shiba Inu screams like her legs were being cut off with a rusty butter knife when she has her nails cut. Does that mean her nails should never be cut because she doesn't like it?

I have certainly see Cesar hit, albeit not "thump" a dog for bad behavior and I only watched half of one show. The dog was jumping up while being leashed and he touched it in some way that made it yelp and jerk away.

p.s. typing in that inage code for the second time as usual. Is there a way to make the letters just a little easier to see?

I don't see how or why telling a dog to sit who would otherwise jump all over somebody that comes through the door as a bad/mean/cruel thing. The praise comes once the dog relaxes.

I make my dogs sit and stay before I take their leashes off when they've been brought in from a walk. Sometimes it's because they have muck on their feet that I don't want tracked through the house, but generally it's just becasue I don't feel like chasing them around the house to remove their leashes. Once they sit and the leashes are removed, they are given a "Okay" which means they are free to go about whatever it is they are going to do.

I use these types of techniques with both of them and I can't see anything heavy handed about it. The only difference is that I don't gush over them. I cannot give Ella lots of verbal praise because she gets too excited, so praise has to be subtle. Taz on the other hand can be given lots of verbal praise as he just wiggles his stub at me.

Just because I like Cesar doesn't mean I walk around thumping my dogs for bad behavior. Cesar doesn't even thump dogs for bad behavior, although those that have never watched his show will state as much.

As a friend of mine said once, living with a dog is a compromise. They need their needs met, but they and we need to compromise on the rest. If a dog were able just to be a dog, they wouldn't care about being housebroken or find any problem with chewing on the arm of the couch. These are human issues and dogs need to be taught that such habits are not acceptable.

I wonder if some of these comments on this topic would be different if I said I didn't like Cesar. It seems as though his nay-sayers are quick to assume that people that do see good things in his approach are automatically evil dog owners. My dogs are not head shy, I can play with their feet, tails, ears, ect...and they don't care. If I was sending them out in the backyard to find their own switch for bad behavior, they wouldn't trust me. I'm still not going to "gush" over them because some group tells me to. My own vet doesn't gush over her dogs and she doesn't side step their bad behavior either. If they do something, they're called on it.

I used to also not understand positive training. I used to think, like many still do, as can be seen from the comments, that it's all about shoving a cookie in the dog's face and letting them walk all over you. Once one actually reads the literature and takes in the science, it's quite an amazing thing. I work with many different kinds of dogs and it's such a joy to see a dog I don't own, that I may have never met before, modify its behavior to what I want based on what I present or take away from it. It's a wonder to see that modification get molded into a habit which is then consistently presented by the dog when needed. I'm glad a big organization like the AVMA is helping spread the information, because it's very hard to educate people one on one when they are convinced that rubbing their dog's nose in poop really DID help housebreak it, or the ubiquitous, "he KNOWS it's wrong!" (Side-tracking a little, I wish anyone reading this would re-thing the concept of right and wrong in the dog's mind. Dogs don't see right or wrong, they only see what they want to do and what people want them to do, which is frequently arbitrary and unnatural to them. Imagine someone punishing you, however lightly, for say, picking up a red mug, or putting on the wrong socks, or pooping in the wrong toilet. What a dog does or doesn't do needs to be guided by incentive; otherwise he sees no reason to do it. We can agree that hurtful punishments are unnecessary and may have bad side effects. But if an owner claims a dog is unaffected by her corrections, then why are they being used at all? Train your dog into habits through rewards or removal thereof and he will fall into desirable patterns of behavior.)

P.S. I agree that training shouldn't be one size fits all. EVERY dog I see is an individual and their programs are built so accordingly.

I am confused. Who said there are no corrections in the use of positive training methods? Of course you need to give feedback to the dog when it is doing something we determine is inappropriate behavior. Perhaps I misused a word in one of my responses. Or is it an assumption/perception that positive methods use no corrections at all? Simply not true.

You are absolutely right that clicking will not stop a dog mid-lunge if it hasn't been trained/modified for that. I would argue there is a difference between handling a situation quickly as it crops up and counterconditioning a dog you know has this issue in the first place. Knowing you have a dog that reacts this way around other dogs, would then mean you would find out how to change this behavior to avoid future out of control reactions. (I hope.)

Of course yanking on a collar in the wrong instance can serve to amp up the dog in question and either make a more negative association to seeing another dog, or add adrenelin to the prey drive dog in question. The goal in either of those situations is to get them out of their reactive mode, where they aren't thinking, only responding to the stimulus.

There is also a difference between prey drive behavior vs dog to dog aggression. Sorry I missed the intent of "butthead mode". :-) Consider of course the dog doesn't think he is being a butthead, just a dog. Our goal is to find out his currency, use that to let him know what makes us happy, and get him on board with that. (simplified example: Hey look there is a squirrel over there. Mom doesn't like us chasing them but it's ok because now we will play ball. ) Not always easy to do, and will take some time, but completly doable with that time and patience.

Try to take the word treat out of the equasion. Replace that with toys, play, petting, smiling. There are MANY ways you can use positive reinforcement. It's not just about food treats as rewards. Treats are just the gateway drug so to speak. I've used tennis balls and frisbees on some non-food motivated dogs. Favorite squeeky toys, kongs, and tug games also work well. (A rolled up towel makes a great tug toy in a pinch)

Have I ever swatted a dog? Yes. But I didn't realize how it translated to the dog. Now I don't. Plus I realized that emotion almost always was a factor in using swatting. Think about it. When you are calm, (not singling out any specific person here) do you still want to swat the dog?

Tail Wags

Marie,
Corrections shouldn’t be violent, and in my opinion never telling a dog its wrong is dishonest and counterproductive. Dogs are very honest with us, and I think we owe it to them to make acceptable/non-acceptable behaviors very clear. For example if a dog who knows a proper sit breaks the sit-stay, why would I not correct that? Whether I correct with a step forward, a leash-pop or with an “uh-uh” it’s still a correction.
None of these corrections are violent. Corrections are not the same as abuse (hitting).
While dogs don’t hit they do use both verbal and physical corrections with each other.
This is why I wish the statement differentiated between discipline, corrections and punishment. They are not all one and the same, and do not have to be used to the exclusion of rewards. The trick is to maintain a healthy balance for you and the individual dog.

“Oh and "Click to Calm" by Emma Parsons (for APBT adopter for those reactive dogs) “
I haven’t read this book, but I did read the Amazon reviews. It appears that the book is marketed as “clear and easy recipes for success,” sounds like balanced system of corrections and rewards is not the only lazy way out.
From the reviews it seems like the book is a great tool for fear-aggressive dogs that may lack confidence. Unfortunately dogs are not always reactive out of fear. While it’s possible to use a clicker and treats to distract and desensitize a dog slowly, it will not stop them pursuing another animal mid-lunge (which is what I meat by butthead mode) when they’re too pumped up to pay attention and killing the other animal is much more rewarding than any treat. Same reason orca trainers can’t click common sense to an animal that is dragging someone underwater. Of course in a perfect universe an animal would never get to that point, but animals aren’t perfect.

Creature,
Interesting comments about CM I may actually have to watch the show one day. It seems to me that I will be just as discouraged by his approach as I am by the pure-positive methods – they’re too cookie cutter. There is no such thing as one size fits all training.

I dunno if I see the same thing at all in regards to CM and women. I remember quite a few episodes where it was the man of the couple causing the problems and a couple of episodes where the woman has quite a bit of experience with dogs, particularly rescues, and finally runs into the one who is a puzzle to her -- I thought that CM was respectful of the women's abilities in those instances.

I find that he deals with many of the women (particularly the giggly, breathy-voiced, flirty, helpless types) with much more patience than I would! Many women (and men) would benefit from developing some assertiveness and confidence and that's consistently part of his message.

Creature: Sorry about the comment thing. It's an RSS bug, I'm told. Try not clicking on the 'subscribe to this post,' much as I'd hate you to miss out! Thanks for joining us! And yes, I thought it was just my sensitivity on the Cesar and women thing. The few times I've observed, it seems his body language tells a lot about what he thinks of women. But, again, I may be overly sensitive.

Cesar is a hot topic on on the breed forum I organize. I am personally not a fan, at all. But many are. I have never really had to put true 'behavior modification' to the test, as my dog is only 7.5# (easily controlled and encouraged with a gentle demeanor) and she's very well behaved. But, I truly believe we lucked out, honestly. I read a ton of books, but so far things have gone exceptionally smooth.
That being said - does anyone else find Cesar has serious issues with women? I find on his show that any problems are almost always the female's fault (if it's a couple). And when he does his little one-on-one summaries with the camera, diagnosing the dog's problem(s) he speaks very patronizingly of emotional females. At this point I am usually scrambling for the remote control to turn the channel, or else I'd toss my TV out the window.

Hey, this is eating my comments.

Test.

I use positive reinforcement with all my animals – birds, dogs, fish – I’ve trained our fish to put on a colorful display to get fed. I’m just too darn lazy to bother with any other method, really.

I look at this way by using aversives and worrying about dominance you can be the “Boss or “The Alpha” or whatever as long as you can keep winning, but using positive reinforcement you get to be “The Deity”- the giver (or withholder/taker) of all things.

Makes me sound like a power-mad, control freak, I know!

Positive reinforcement is not a free-lunch and is not always a simple solution. But complex problems (like dog aggression) don’t have simple solutions, otherwise they wouldn’t be “complex problems”.

You could say of positive reinforcement training/operant conditioning what Winston Churchill said of democracy: “ It is the worst system, except for all the others.”

That's called Learned Helplessness. The dog gives up and lets people do whatever they want. Including cause physical pain. It is very sad to see.

My dog was abused so much in the past that when examined by a vet, he just stands there, terrified, not moving, and not reacting. It makes it difficult to make a diagnosis sometimes since he doesnt always react to pain, or if he does, its subtle. The vets call him well behaved and laid back, but with the position of his ears and tail, its not that way at all. It happens to horses, too. They shut down when presented with a situation where they were punished in the past, and dont understand why. Easier to sit there and ignore the procedure.

I only have to step towards him and he cringes and ducks down, although he has improved over time. And he wouldnt take food from me. Still has trouble eating in front of me. The worst punishment I give him now is verbal - Uh Uh. And its enough, most of the time. Or I take away - or take him away from - the temptation (eg cat's food bowl). Being a terrier, he likes to go back and try again, but I would never hit him for it.

Not everyone is a dog trainer. But it would be good if all pet owners went to a couple of good obedience classes with their dog, and learnt the basics, but also kept it up for the life of the dog - refreshers every so often. Then dogs could be under better control, especially on walks, and less of a danger to others. Also better behaved members of the household. I mean, we train our kids dont we?

I hate it when I forget stuff in my posts.

Yes dogs have memory. Not sure what that has to do with avoiding you when they made a mess. I'd say they are reacting more to your irritated body language. You can change you voice all you want, if you body radiates annoyance they will know it. Dogs are good at reading every subtle sign we give them. Inadvertant or not. Some dogs also fall victim to knowing the presence of mess and their person at the same time gets them punishment which they try to avoid. If punishment worked in that instance, it would only take one or two messes for them to learn not to do it there again. I would also consider that what many people read as guilt is actually submissive body posture. They see your angry body language and return with an appeasement signal. "I don't knwo why you are angry but I am not going to make it worse by overt interaction." Submission is frequently misread by humans as guilt.

Punishing a dog from growling will only serve to give you a dog that will one day bite with NO warning. Because by punishing the communication, you take that away from them. You need to change the emotion of the event, or use management depending on the specifics of the why of the growling. (which either means, I am uncomfortable, stop that, or get away from me)

Training and behavior modification are, in general, two different things. (Training=sit, stay,down, etc. BMod=reactive dogs,food aggression, etc) What CM does is supression of behavior, not behavior modification. Suppression may stop a behavior, but it doesn't address why they are doing it in the first place which is usually key to long term success. Fine IF the dog can be managed for the rest of it's days and continue to be supressed. Suppression can bring up other issues though. Personally I would love to see follow up a year down the road for many of his cases.

While he is ok at handling dogs, I disagree that he reads them well. If that were true he would be bitten far less than he is on the show. And if you watch the show without sound and keep an eye on the body language those dogs are giving you may change your mind. (knowing dog body language and what you are seeing is important though)

I didn't read the article. No need. I have attended plenty of seminars, and read plenty of books, and watched plenty of videos on the subject to know that TRUE behavior modification is NEVER done using harsh techniques. With ANY animal. And I have been around long enough to know to defer to the experts, REAL experts on this specific subject.

(And yes I admit don't know everything. I will always continue to learn more on the subject of dog behavior. It is a facinating field after all.)

You can only do better when you know better. You can only know better IF you actually study the learning theory behind positive reinforcement. That is, if you have a sincere interest in teaching your dog in a non-violent manner. It isn't new science either. How long have they been training dolphins using hands off methods? (Can't imagine one of them in a choke collar.)

"Excelerated learning" by Pamela Reid PhD
"Don't shoot the dog" by Karen Pryor
"The other end of the leash" and "For love of a dog" by Patricia McConnell PhD
"Kicked, Bitten and Scratched" by Amy Sutherland
and "The Culture Clash" by Jean Donaldson are a few places to start.
Oh and "Click to Calm" by Emma Parsons (for APBT adopter for those reactive dogs)

Use whatever methods you like, it's your dog after all, but realize just because it works for you (in your perception) that doesn't make it best for your dog.

I have owned akitas going on 16 years now. They are not a breed for a push over owner. So I will repeat: Positive does NOT equal permissive.

Methods when I began and now are so drasticly different they don't compare. While I do know how to use those older methods appropriately, which is the key in order to be fair to the dog, they are NEVER my first choice. I have to admit I was not an easy convert to it either. Old habits die hard. But once I saw the undeniable results, in both my dogs AND my relationship with them, the game was over. I know better so I do better.

Dogs don't hit each other so that act doesn't translate very well to them. Yes they learn to avoid the swat, and possibly the person giving it, but do they stop that behavior entirely? (If so why the need to hit them ever again?) Communicating in their own language, using body and facial expressions, is much more effective in my opinion. It just may take some time for them to understand that suddenly YOU understand them and can communicate with them after all. It becomes more of a two way street.

Our society is a lazy one. Heaven forbid we have to put consistent effort onto anything. Lets use the quick fix instead. Nevermind that it may have some pretty damaging fallout later.

A true pack leader is benevolent through their actions, not violent.

Just my two cents on the subject.

P.S. You don't need to use a clicker to use positive reinforcement either. It can be adapted to verbal only which is how I use it. (or hand signals for deaf dogs)

Stacy, I agree with you. No matter what everyone else is saying. If I didn't punish my corgi, she'd rule the house. She tries to as it is. She growls if she doesn't like something -- such as going to the crate whenever I go out for awhile.

Because I didn't use the touchy feely, dogs are overly sensitive and should be treated like a child--- she wouldn't be as good as she is today. She jumps a little on people but knows that sitting will get her what she wants. She knows if she doesn't bark for unnecessary reasons, then she wont get swatted. She still has mistakes and that's clearly okay, but on the whole -- she isn't a demon in the house.

She's nothing like you see on the Dog Whisperer shows. She doesn't "own" anything and has NEVER bit at me. I think I'll stick to my ways. Call the cops for animal abuse, but it works.

I have to say 'ditto' to EmilyS's response. And I agree with Mary that McConnell's books are must reads. I also recomment Suzanne Clothier's 'Bones. . . From The Sky' book. Kind of like many other things in life, an extreme in either direction is the problem. Dogs aren't happy (or safe!) without strong leadership, but they're not happy living with a despot either. The main problem I have with a show like Milan's is that it really should be considered entertainment, not instruction on how to train your dog, and his one size fits all philosophy. Taken as a complete picture, I agree with Cesar's ideals, if not with all of his methods. But I don't know how many times I have seen people give their dogs a sharp poke with their fingers, or a slap, and say 'shish', and yet they never give their dogs any exercise. They take the piece, or pieces, that they think will be a quick fix (15 minutes, just like Milan!) and leave out all the stuff they're too lazy to do. For all of us that visit Dolittler, maybe a lot of this is really all just semantics, but a surprising number of the general public are still back in the dark ages of rubbing a puppies nose in their own feces; I know, because I work with people that have no more knowledge of dog training than that. And they've left that puppy home alone, loose in the house, for 9-12 hours, and think this 3 month old puppy is 'taking revenge' by soiling the carpet! Umm, hello? Can an adult human 'hold it' for that long? I think, in gereral, there is too much exposure to 'you have to be alpha', 'if you don't lead the dogs will take over', 'never let the dog walk out the door before you', 'don't let them sleep in your bed' and all that bs, and not enough exposure to REAL CANINE psychology and an understanding of the responsibilities of a REAL pack leader. Long winded, but. . .if the only solution you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.

How does the word correction equal beating or hitting? I don't hit my dogs, as there is no reason to, just like there is no reason to yell at my dogs. They are not deaf, but they are capable of selective hearing or being a butthead like somebody else said.

I don't have "wallflower" dogs in my house. My German Shepard that was very much a wallflower that did not need to be dealt with like the ones I have now. If I treated my current 2 like I did her, I'd be ripping my hair out, however if I got after her like I do with the 2 I have now, she would have literally became part of the floor.

Alittle common sense needs to be used...

I think the place of physical punishment can certain be 'optional'--quite possibly in all cases. And I say that as a person who has slapped a dog on the head a few times.

My problem with this statement is that it fails to distinguish between corrections, punishment and discipline (the Monks of New Skete offer a great explanation). They all have their place in training a dog, just like rewards have their place.
There is nothing wrong with rewarding a dog for good behavior, just like there is nothing wrong with correcting a dog for an inappropriate behavior once the dog knows what is expected of it.
The problem lies not within a specific technique, but with it being used incorrectly. Rewards and corrections are just tools used in teaching a dog, and teaching should be the focus of training.
Additionally a dog's age, healthy and personality should all be taken into account when choosing a training method. I would love to see the author click&treat his way with a dog-reactive dog in full butthead mode.
Overall I think the intent was good, but the execution is lacking and too reliant on scare tactics.

I didn't see the message as touchy feely.

"We’ve all seen dogs punished inconsistently without a clear causal relationship between the behavior and the punishment and correction applied too harshly or only when the punisher is angry."

Seems remarkably explicit that punishment is not always innately evil but boy-howdy is it more prone to go wrong when people act when angry or plain don't have much of a plan for how to train the dog.

And, necessary or not, it is my impression that dogs trained with frequent (daily or more) physical punishment tend to be more nervous--that includes my own prior experiences and a few papers out there on specific technique used with service dogs.

I see physical punishment as a bit like stockman's stick or dog tethers, they have a place but are awfully prone to overuse and abuse when seen as a 'freely permitted' technique. The guidelines are more an indicator to the unaware/unknowing owner than a prohibition for the informed trainer.

We have 2 related, though opposite, problems with dogs today.
One is the excessive use of force/punishment with the consequences this report notes. But the other is excessive permissiveness, which is what Millan deals with on his show. BOTH cause behavior problems.. the kind that result in dogs biting people and/or dogs ending up in shelters. I'm not sure that one problem is worse than the other.

I don't believe in a "one size fits all" approach. Corrections are part of training.. a correction can be a nonresponse, withholding attention, whack on the butt, a yank on a chain, an ear pinch, or a beating. Which of these corrections is abusive? We probably all agree on the last one. But perhaps about none of the others.

Katie- I have no problem with giving my dogs praise, just as I don't allow them to do what whatever they want as that would be a nightmare.

What I walked away with in the article that Dr.Patty posted was that dogs are sensitive wallflowers that will break if you don't correct improper or bad behavior. That's what got me. I never said that I never give my dogs affection or allow them to mess up occasionally as I think they do retain things better sometimes when they learn something the hard way as long as they are not in any type of danger.

The "touchy-feely don't hurt the dogs feelings"thing is just...Blech! I don't know where it came from, but I see this stuff all the time with parents and their children and it drives me nuts. If this mentality is a extension of the human version, somebody needs to step back and realise that dogs are not children although children do not break when they are busted for naughty behavior either, just ask my son. The phone rang when he got home from school and he got the look of dread on his face because he knew who was on the phone and what I was about to be told. It wasn't a horrific thing he did, but it was something that he has been spoken to about repeatedly by his teacher and us and he did it anyway.

If people don't like Cesar, that's fine, but his show shows plenty of people that use the " Don't hurt the dogs feelings" approach and their dogs become monsters in one way shape or form. These owners forget that what they are dealing with is a dog and dogs need manners, not to be treated like a spolied 2 year old. The word "punishment" in and of itself suggests human behavior and I don't buy that either. I don't send my dogs to their room when they are being obnoxious, I correct the obnoxious behavior as it's happening and then the issue is dropped.

If it bothers people that I said Taz would take over my house if I didn't set ground rules and enforce them, there is nothiong I can do about. It is what it is, however he gets plenty of back massages, ear massages, cookies and just quality time with all humans in this house. I can't remmeber the last time I had to get on him for bad behavior, so in the world of Taz, it's all good.

Please, I don't think the "vengeance" the many pekes I have known (not just my own) have affected are the same as human vengeance - more like a mule or camel. Not the same at all.

My dogs are very well behaved, and the swat I am talking about is about equivalent to the soft-mouthed bite a mother dog gives pups who are misbehaving - and then I make sure to let my dog know that I still love them - and they are a valued member of the pack - but not the alpha.

It is perhaps a failing in vocabulary as I was raised with the attitude that a dog is a dog and a cat is a cat - and neither are human. I was asked what I had done wrong the one and only time I got bit. (Pulling the tail fo a dog when I was old enough to know better. He never bit little ones, but seemed to know the age when you knew better.)

I think a lot of dog owners use language that drives behaviorists crazy even when they aren't making their animal's behavior equivalent to human, they tend to use the same language as if it were human.

Now, I will say, I would never recommend a pekingese to a first time dog owner. They are just too ornery - and sneakier than some realize. I might make an exception for someone transitioning from very ornery cats to dogs, but this is a notoriously stubborn breed with a mind of "what can I get away with." They can easily become little tyrants if you aren't careful. They will, on occasion try to play up their pack position, but the experienced owner knows how to handle that.

This breed knows when they have done something that is displeasing and will actively work to hide it if they can. (I had one that would try and "mop up" any accident she had - even when she was sick!)

I am not very familiar with this 'dog whisperer' character. I don't have cable. And, it seems to me, he certainly has quite a few supporters and detractors. There are a lot of ways to effectively train a dog - some are kind, some are cruel, some are a combination thereof. B.F. Skinner did not get everything right.

I also don't think my experience with a toy breed is generalizable to most large breeds. Most large breeds I have dealt with have either been of the "dumb golden" or the "trained guard dog" which I find to be really, really dull. (I realize that this is not true of all large dogs, it is just my experience.)

Oh, and beagles are smarter than their owners for the most part. I don't care how well-trained you think your beagle is, it will outsmart you around something because they live to do such.

Pax,

MLO

>I love my dogs, but they are not allowed to rule my house...

You don't have to rely on punishment in order to be in charge. Not at all. Controlling resources is far far more effective. Teaching the dogs to respect you, look to you for cues, and ask permission is extremely powerful and can be done without intimidation tactics. Positive does not mean permissive.

My pit bull bitch is as confident as they come. In a house with a push-over owner, she'd be an absolute nightmare. She's taught me so much about how to be an effective owner, and I'm endlessly grateful to her. And to my trainer who taught me how to change behavior through means other than physical punishment.

HI Emily,
Yes, taking a step back so the dog can't connect at all, is what i teach-nancy

I can see the command to sit (alt. behav reinforced) or turning and walking away (remove opportunity) working and I do both, but standing still? I think I would suffer death by border collie pummelling as he finds jumping on a person innately rewarding as far as I can tell. There is a difference between time out and 'ignoring'.

I agree Dr P-I linked to you today.
http://mainepets.mainetoday.com/blogs/adogslife/
Stacy, of course you can teach a dog by catching them being good, I do it all the time. It was a huge eye opener for me when I learned how to teach a dog to be operant. Dogs need to learn that they need to do something to get something. That something is not always a cookie. It could be our affection, or a toy or whatever the dog wants at that time. Even super bouncy dogs can figure this out. Behavior that is rewarded is likley to be repeated.
When we teach our dogs to be operant then we don't have to spend so much time telling them what to do, -or what not to do! they too busy figure out what we want.-Nancy

Stacy: I use that technique on my Vincent to great effect when he gets inappropriate in any way. A simple command to sit repeated a couple of times with praise does chill him out--especially because most of his unwanted behaviors are stress-related.

"For instance, dogs jump to greet people in order to get their attention. Owners usually provide attention by talking or yelling, pushing them down, or otherwise touching them. A better solution would be to remove attention by standing silently and completely still and then to immediately reward with attention or treats once the dogs sits. This learning-based approach leads to a better understanding of our pets and consequently to a better human-pet relationship"

LOL- I gather the person that wrote this has never shared a home with a Jack! Ella would jump and run around in circles for hours if I let her. I agree that there is no need to yell, push or hit, however, teaching a dog to sit then be given attention once the dogs butt and all four paws are on the floor is just as effective and it elimates wasting time standing around waiting for the dog to chill out.

It may be a breed thing, but all of my pekes who have left messes have done their best to avoid us as soon as they see <i>where</i> we are. The skulking behavior to do something they know is wrong is very different from other behavior.

I mean, really, even if we use the same tone of voice that we holler "treat," the dog won't come if he knows where we are! He skulks off. So, I don't buy that they have no memory. Puppies have no memories - but neither do little kids.

I don't believe in "hitting" a dog, but a short, light swat works wonders at hurting the pride of a peke who will then go off and sulk - but if it knows it did wrong won't seek vengeance. (Now, if accused wrongly, I know of several cases of vengeance being sought and taken by such actions as peeing all over a bed that the dog never jumped on before then.)

Pax,

MLO

I don't have a problem with Cesar amd what he does. If I tried the "Spare the rod to spoil the dog" approach with my dogs, I'd be a doggie doormat. Ella wouldn't be much of a problem, but Taz would certainly take over and he would not be nice about it. As it is, the only time he acts up now is when he gets a bath. He doesn't growl or bite, but he does give me that look that says "If I thought I could get away with, I would bite you!"

In his youth, he did snap at me once and he's never done it again. Now the old boy is 11 and has cancer, so he'd rather spend his time and energy napping on my bed away from the little noise maker named Ella, but if I had just dealt with his issues the way it's suggested, I can almost guarantee he would have made a career of snapping at me just because I wanted him to do something that he had issues with. Having a bath, in the house, with warm water and shampoo is not the biggest crime a human could inflict on a dog.

I love my dogs, but they are not allowed to rule my house...

Hello my Dog hit her ear and is now in pain she is a shitzu nine years old what can I do to calm the pain till I take her to the vet

She was running playing and hit her self in the ear. She is a Shitzu nine years old. What can I do to calm her pain till I take her to the Vet. Worried