Voodoo

[kelpiegirl]

Root beer:

 

Wrt the dog that you mention below being unnerved by a crowd, to perform a routine, I would have to ask, is it worth it? Why put the dog in a position to suffer fear, just to perform? Or, is it an opportunity to show the world that a behaviour can be over come by ascribed methods? I have done "stupid pet tricks" obedience, agility, frisbee, you name it, with several dogs. If my dogs were completely un-nerved by an audience, I would seriously question why I am doing the performance with that dog.

 

 

As to my point, there was no point, it was a legitimate question. How would you handle it? To make it more generic, say the sheep aren't even in sight, but the dog knows they are there.

 

 

That question is about as relevant to this discussion as me asking you how you would help a dog who is unnerved by an audience perform a choreographed routine full of very technical movements to music in front of an audience with confidence.

 

In fact, it nicely highlights the point that I've been making in this discussion. I'm not the person to answer that question because it is not my area of knowledge and experience. If you have a stockdog question, ask a stockdog trainer. If you want to talk about something I actually have had experience with - like behavior modification or clicker training for pet manners or sports - I'd be happy to do that. I don't think that's really what you are interested in discussing, though. Why don't you just make the point that you want to make through the line of questioning that you started above?

[topnotchdog]

So, I am not a big Bill Murray fan or anything (and I have no idea if he uses prong collars or cookies to train his dog), but this thread is reminding me a lot of that movie "Groundhog Day."

 

Frankly, I don't see how whacking a dog for not wanting to take a dumbbell or for mouthing it instead of taking it would be seen as something that would make a dog *want* to take a dumbbell, but maybe I'm missing something.

 

 

Similar to how I'm missing something when I read that kicking a dog is a chosen method for teaching leash manners (Donald McCaig, I confess I hope you don't mean that literally). Perhaps some things are better left a mystery, I dunno. Not the mystery why either of those works (that is not so mysterious, in fact), more why one would go the kicking or 'whacking' route if they knew of alternatives that might be worth a try.

 

And by the way, I think semantics are confusing things again. As I recall the phrase "purely positive" training came in vogue after the late Patty Ruzzo teamed up with Ted Turner, right around when Shiela Booth came out with "Purely Positive Training: Companion to Competition." The term kind of stuck with some whose pendulums swung in that direction---they were gratified to see an alternative to pain in the name of obedience (both lowercase and capital O) training. But just as other trainers describe themselves as "balance" trainers, "purely positive" had its marketing reasons. In my experience most have dropped the "purely," no? Besides, I am not sure how useful it is to compare something called "purely positive" training with "AKC-style OTCH" training or with methods a pet dog trainer or behaviorist would employ. Apples and oranges...

 

 

Personally, I feel that OTCH-style obedience has become so extreme in many of its facets as to be practically useless for the average pet.

 

However impressive the results are (precision, reliability, etc.), having put an OTCh on a dog does not automatically mean that dog comes when called outside the ring, minds their manners in the house, or does not pull on leash when not in a heads-up, attention heel. On the flip side, well-mannered pet dogs don't need an OTCh to be well-trained pets--or dare I say it, even an OTCh trainer--to get the results they need for their daily lives.

 

I think this is where the movie starts to replay again. Dang, that Andie McDowell bugs me.

 

Barbara

[geonni banner]

So, I am not a big Bill Murray fan or anything (and I have no idea if he uses prong collars or cookies to train his dog), but this thread is reminding me a lot of that movie "Groundhog Day."

 

I think this is where the movie starts to replay again. Dang, that Andie McDowell bugs me.

 

Barbara

 

EEEEEEheeheeheehee! "I got you babe..."

 

I'm gonna try to stay out of this one.

[Root Beer]

Wrt the dog that you mention below being unnerved by a crowd, to perform a routine, I would have to ask, is it worth it? Why put the dog in a position to suffer fear, just to perform?

 

That is a question that one must answer in that situation. If the dog is experiencing abject terror, then it probably is not worth it. If it is some moderate nerves in a specific situation, then it may be a mild fear that can be overcome.

 

If it can be overcome through a reasonable amount of training, then why not? It could be that once the fear is no longer an issue, the dog might enjoy performing. And in the long run the dog, working with the handler as a team in performance, just might find the endeavor one in which he or she thrives and experiences great joy.

 

That is something the handler has to feel out and determine. What is best for the dog in the long run? Will the work required benefit the team, both dog and handler?

 

Or, is it an opportunity to show the world that a behaviour can be over come by ascribed methods?

 

I don't think anyone goes to that much effort just to "show the world", most of which is not even paying attention, something about a method.

 

I have done "stupid pet tricks" obedience, agility, frisbee, you name it, with several dogs.

 

What is "stupid pet tricks" to you is something that is a true passion for others. I get that it isn't for you. That doesn't make it the case for everyone, but to many of us sports and performance is far from "stupid pet tricks".

 

Can you imagine if I described stockwork as "playing with the little sheepies". :D

 

If my dogs were completely un-nerved by an audience, I would seriously question why I am doing the performance with that dog.

 

Looking at it a different way, isn't overcoming a fear - any fear - good for a dog? Even if it is something that the dog does not technically "have to" deal with in life, isn't building confidence a good thing? Overcoming the fear of performing in front of people may well give the dog confidence that will benefit him or her in every aspect of life. I've seen it happen. In fact, a very controlled scenario like that is an excellent venue in which to help the dog overcome the fear without subjecting the dog to suffering in the process. Win-win.

 

Again, I'm not talking abject terror here, or full blown panic. I would still want to help a dog with that, but in that case eliminating what is not absolutely necessary would be part of the help.

 

As to my point, there was no point, it was a legitimate question. How would you handle it? To make it more generic, say the sheep aren't even in sight, but the dog knows they are there.

 

I still think this is very much off topic. I'm thinking that if I say how I would handle the situation, you will not like something about it for some reason. And all that will prove is that we would handle the situation differently based on how we each choose to train and handle our dogs. We know that going in. It doesn't really indicate anything about whether or not an OTCH winner is the most appropriate instructor for someone whose dog needs help with a behavior issue.

[juliepoudrier]

So, I am not a big Bill Murray fan or anything (and I have no idea if he uses prong collars or cookies to train his dog), but this thread is reminding me a lot of that movie "Groundhog Day."

Oh, I *liked* Groundhog Day (says a lot for my mental state, huh?). A lot of my life feels that way. (And if you stick around here long enough Barbara, you'll find that many, many threads seem like Groundhog Day.)

 

============================================

 

And I'll admit to having pushed/poked/booted/whatever you want to call it my dogs with my foot before (don't know if that counts as "kicking in the seat of the pants") when said dog was ignoring me and I happened to be behind it. But I still wouldn't hit a dog in the face for not taking a dumbbell. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite. And I still think Donald was really talking about a swift correction and not necessarily actually kicking the dog as in cause the dog pain, but that's just my interpretation and maybe he really does kick dogs. Only he knows for sure.

 

J.

[NCStarkey]

Hello everyone,

 

Just a bit of a deviation from the topic, but this is about using force to teach a dog to take a dumbbell. Julie mentioned that she didn't know how smacking/whacking/hitting a dog in the face would make it *want* to take a dumbbell, and neither do I. However, back about a hundred years ago when I was active in competitive obedience, the usual method was to pinch the dog's ear to get it to take the dumbbell. If the dog wasn't sensitive enough to react to the ear pinch, the trainer would use the ring on the choke collar to apply a bit more pain. The theory was that when the dog felt the pain, it would open it's mouth to yelp, and at that moment the dumbbell was placed into the dog's mouth. The ear pinch was not used to make the dog want to take the dumbbell, it was used to make the dog not want to not take it. Make sense?

 

Also, as someone who was quite active in competitive obedience, whose dogs were multiple high in trial winners, whose dogs earned dog world awards, etc., I feel that competitive obedience even at the highest level is no more that glorified parlor tricks when compared to stockwork.

 

Regards to all,

nancy

[Blackdawgs]

In my experience, "positive", reinforcement-based training is great for teaching tricks, sport, and desensitization/ counterconditioning of fearful dogs, etc, but does very poorly with behaviors that are highly, instrinsically reinforcing.

 

The uber-keen sheep dog dragging its handler to stock is no different than the pet dog that drags its handler down the sidewalk. Positive trainers and their associated books all say that this is a very "easy" behavior to fix, that one should play the stop and go game, the red light green game or whatever you want to call it. The bottom line is that the dog must never move forward unless the leash is slack. Going forward can be the reward or the reward can be a click and treat. Easy peasy.

 

Of course, the trainers and the books don't tell you that the dog can never be walked on a leash unless the leash is slack and until the loose leash behavior is proofed. Which puts one in a bit of a bind if one doesn't have a fenced yard and the dog has to be walked outside to eliminate and one is running late to work and just doesn't have the time to wait for the leash to go slack.

 

So, then the "positive" trainers throw-up their arms, blame the owner, and slap a Gentle Leader, which is supposed to be a "positive" training device, on the dog. After having used one for several months, I'd say that the positiveness of the GL is arguable and my BC would probably agree.

 

I had a fence fighting situation that was simply intractable and I spent a very long time trying to address it with "positive" methods (barriers, Premack, a clicker and peanut butter, a drag line, a whistle[she was afraid and this produced a slinking dog], etc etc etc) and some not so positive methods, short of a shock collar. In the end, the problem was fixed with a recall, and my recall problem was fixed using an adversive that was very meaningful to this particular dog, far more meaningful than the lack of a cookie for not coming or the temporary loss of freedom caused by my walking the dog into the house on a drag line. While the adversive (picking the dog up and carrying her into the house) was not physically painful, the lack of self-ambulation had a powerful psychological affect on the dog.

 

BTW, when I played the stop and go loose leash walking game with my pulling BC, she was perfectly happy to stand on the sidewalk on a tight leash while watching squirrels, the birds, the insects, the leaves rustling in the trees, and the stray cats.

 

In the end, the dog gets to decide what is adversive and reinforcing, not us.

[rushdoggie]

In my experience, "positive", reinforcement-based training is great for teaching tricks, sport, and desensitization/ counterconditioning of fearful dogs, etc, but does very poorly with behaviors that are highly, instrinsically reinforcing.

 

The uber-keen sheep dog dragging its handler to stock is no different than the pet dog that drags its handler down the sidewalk. Positive trainers and their associated books all say that this is a very "easy" behavior to fix, that one should play the stop and go game, the red light green game or whatever you want to call it. The bottom line is that the dog must never move forward unless the leash is slack. Going forward can be the reward or the reward can be a click and treat. Easy peasy.

 

I hate that too...

 

FWIW, I never found loose leash walking easy. In fact, I have found it consistently hard to get and teach and very frustrating. I refuse to collar pop a dog period due to the potential for injury, and a dog pulling hard on a collar can injure itself too. A properly fitted prong collar can eliminate pulling while the dog is wearing it, but my experience has shown that the loose lead didn't translate to a flat collar later when I needed it...same issue with head halters.

 

M. Shirley Chong talks about the communication up and down the lead and she points out owners often *teach* their dogs to pull in the manner in which they teach them to wear a lead...her musings made a lot of sense. A few people have started to go forward and work with that idea. Here are 2 links:

 

1. The Silky Leash

 

link to website

 

After I saw this, I started using this with my then 11 year old dog who tended to pull on his lead when excited and I saw a dramatic improvement. It was pretty cool.

 

2. Recently, Helix Fairweather put together these videos. I have only watched them once, but they look cool and I plan to watch them more closely and try this with my next dog.

 

Lynn Martin, KPA CTP, and I have created a tutorial for SHAPING POLITE

WALKING. This is a 100% positive reinforcement method for building your

dog's ability to walk on a slack leash. This tutorial is in three parts and

is currently on www.vimeo.com at the following addresses:

 

Part 1: http://www.vimeo.com/13110409

 

Part 2: http://www.vimeo.com/13562479

 

Part 3: http://www.vimeo.com/13321611

 

These are publicly accessible. Feel free to pass the links on to anyone you

like. I will be putting the same video clips on YouTube also. You can find

them via the tags or the title. My YouTube username is helix137; you can

search on that also.

 

Helix Fairweather, KPA CTP

 

I am SOOOO happy that these are coming out...this has been a huge hole in my training. My dog can "heel" perfectly but in a low-attention, lets-go-take-a-walk situation he would consistently pull.

 

I had a fence fighting situation that was simply intractable and I spent a very long time trying to address it with "positive" methods (barriers, Premack, a clicker and peanut butter, a drag line, a whistle[she was afraid and this produced a slinking dog], etc etc etc) and some not so positive methods, short of a shock collar. In the end, the problem was fixed with a recall, and my recall problem was fixed using an adversive that was very meaningful to this particular dog, far more meaningful than the lack of a cookie for not coming or the temporary loss of freedom caused by my walking the dog into the house on a drag line. While the adversive (picking the dog up and carrying her into the house) was not physically painful, the lack of self-ambulation had a powerful psychological affect on the dog.

 

Sounds like a good answer for you, and despite your "aversive" being an technically aversive you did no harm.

 

How did you eventually teach loose lead walking?

 

In the end, the dog gets to decide what is adversive and reinforcing, not us.

 

+1

 

Just try rewarding me with creamed corn and see how reinforcing I find it.

[Root Beer]

Positive trainers and their associated books all say that this is a very "easy" behavior to fix, that one should play the stop and go game, the red light green game or whatever you want to call it. The bottom line is that the dog must never move forward unless the leash is slack. Going forward can be the reward or the reward can be a click and treat. Easy peasy.

 

What books are you reading? Seriously? Could you please give me a reference for a book by a reinforcement based trainer who refers to this as "easy peasy"? Book, author, and chapter would be great.

 

Yes, that is one technique to teach loose leash walking. It is certainly not the only one. And it would not normally be my choice for the reason you cited below. Many dogs are content to stand at the end of the tight leash and take in the world. In that case, it's the handler's job to make it more clear to the dog how to be right and to reinforce effectively.

 

Of course, the trainers and the books don't tell you that the dog can never be walked on a leash unless the leash is slack and until the loose leash behavior is proofed.

 

Really? Again, could I have a specific reference for this?

 

So, then the "positive" trainers throw-up their arms, blame the owner, and slap a Gentle Leader, which is supposed to be a "positive" training device, on the dog. After having used one for several months, I'd say that the positiveness of the GL is arguable and my BC would probably agree.

 

Actually, I would agree with that, also. I would not typically recommend a Gentle Leader as a tool to manage a dog that is not yet trained to walk on a loose leash.

 

Who is still recommending Gentle Leaders? The reinforcement based trainers that I am most familiar with are not recommending them. There are concerns about neck safety and the fact that many dogs do find them aversive to wear.

 

In the end, the dog gets to decide what is adversive and reinforcing, not us.

 

The dog always decides what is aversive and what is reinforcing, regardless of training method chosen.

 

With a dog that loved to stand and stare at stuff on the street at the end of the leash while walking, I would put that under stimulus control and use that as my primary reinforcer for walking on a loose leash outdoors.

[Blackdawgs]

How did you eventually teach loose lead walking?

 

LOL--I didn't. If she starts pulling really hard, I just call her back to me and tap my leg to keep her near me. Would that be a "correction" or a "directive", I don't know. LOL.

 

I've fooled around with keeping her close to me with a clicker and that works very well, but it's easiest if both hands are free in a leash-less environment. I'm too uncoordinated to juggle a clicker, treats, and a leash (while being vigilent for loose dogs)

 

Interestingly, the stop and go game works much better if the goal is reaching the sheep as opposed to walking down the sidewalk. Because reaching the sheep is more reinforcing to this dog than standing stationary while watching nature. The nice man who allows me to use his sheep, chuckles and tells me that I'm very patient.

 

But, for me, it's just a lazy weekend morning. If I had to move the sheep from point A to point B in a hurry, i would probably just pop the collar or let the dog pull.

[rushdoggie]

LOL--I didn't. If she starts pulling really hard, I just call her back to me and tap my leg to keep her near me. Would that be a "correction" or a "directive", I don't know. LOL.

 

I've fooled around with keeping her close to me with a clicker and that works very well, but it's easiest if both hands are free in a leash-less environment. I'm too uncoordinated to juggle a clicker, treats, and a leash (while being vigilent for loose dogs)

 

Interestingly, the stop and go game works much better if the goal is reaching the sheep as opposed to walking down the sidewalk. Because reaching the sheep is more reinforcing to this dog than standing stationary while watching nature. The nice man who allows me to use his sheep, chuckles and tells me that I'm very patient.

 

But, for me, it's just a lazy weekend morning. If I had to move the sheep from point A to point B in a hurry, i would probably just pop the collar or let the dog pull.

 

 

Look at the links...they are really neat. It was a whole new thought process to me to think about what I was doing on my end of the leash, rather than "managing" or "controller" I work at communicating.

[Blackdawgs]

What books are you reading? Seriously? Could you please give me a reference for a book by a reinforcement based trainer who refers to this as "easy peasy"? Book, author, and chapter would be great.

 

Good morning, Rootbeer. The phrase, "easy peasy" is a literary tool known as hyperbole. Nonetheless, in regard to the "easy' part, I have neither the time nor inclination to quote from my library of training books. I'm sure that you own the same training books as me, if you are interested.

 

Yes, that is one technique to teach loose leash walking. It is certainly not the only one.

 

Correct, an alternative is putting the pulling on command or releasing the dog to "go pull", which I believe is what you are referring to below. And then you risk actually reinforcing the pulling behavior. Because these behaviors can become so reinforcing that the dog's brain gets stuck in an endless loop.

 

Which is exactly how some reinforcement-based techniques made my fence fighting situation much worse (and some were neutral in that the behavior was made neither better nor worse). Now, you will argue that Blackdawgs is a crappy trainer and used the reinforcement-based techniques incorrectly and a better trainer (such as yourself) could have solved the situation using soley reinforcement- based techniques.

 

And maybe Blackdawgs is a crappy trainer, which makes this situation illustrative of a reinforcement-based technique being misapplied and creating an even bigger mess. In the end, my spending 2 weeks strengthening the dog's recall by alternating between an aversive (carrying her furry butt into the house for a failed recall) and rewarding recalls via self-ambulation very well (with a lick of peanut butter) was much much much less damaging than her spending 2 years fence fighting.

 

(BTW, before you blame me for allowing the fence fighting to occur in the first place, I have a privacy fence, so I couldn't see the neighbor dog on the other side until it was too late. Actually, the fighting was so reinforcing to both dogs that they were fighting thru a solid 6 foot high privacy fence which was set back from a second chain link fence by about 4 feet.)

[kelpiegirl]

To add to blackdawg's assertion, I suggest Root beer, that you go to an open level sheepdog trial, and see the dogs, the MYRIAD dogs walking around in the morning, off leash, not causing problems, happy, (of course there will always be the odd one out) and behaving, and no treats/clickers anywhere in sight. Maybe, back to the original post, THIS is Voodoo......

[Root Beer]

Good morning, Rootbeer. The phrase, "easy peasy" is a literary tool known as hyperbole. Nonetheless, in regard to the "easy' part, I have neither the time nor inclination to quote from my library of training books. I'm sure that you own the same training books as me, if you are interested.

 

Based on what you say, I doubt it. While I do own some books that describe the "be a tree" game, none of those authors maintain that the technique is magical (to echo your hyperbole).

 

I seem to own some books that you do not, however, if that is the only reinforcement based technique that you are familiar with for loose leash walking.

 

Correct, an alternative is putting the pulling on command or releasing the dog to "go pull", which I believe is what you are referring to below. And then you risk actually reinforcing the pulling behavior. Because these behaviors can become so reinforcing that the dog's brain gets stuck in an endless loop.

 

This is something that I was concerned about, too, before I started to use the technique myself and saw some stunning results.

 

Now, you will argue that Blackdawgs is a crappy trainer and used the reinforcement-based techniques incorrectly and a better trainer (such as yourself) could have solved the situation using soley reinforcement- based techniques.

 

I have a feeling that this is going to get misinterpreted like there's no tomorrow, but I really want to ask you this - if I know how to apply a technique in a way that you might not, how would that make you a "crappy trainer"?

 

That makes no sense me whatsoever.

 

Based on what you write, I get the impression that I have extensive more experience with using reinforcement in training than you have and I have learned some things about it that you haven't had the opportunity to learn yet. It is, after all, something that I have been studying and using for many years and is a way of life for my own dogs. And I have had enough success with it to have confidence in it's ability to produce the results that I desire. And I'm certainly not the only one.

 

That says absolutely nothing about you.

 

And maybe Blackdawgs is a crappy trainer, which makes this situation illustrative of a reinforcement-based technique being misapplied and creating an even bigger mess.

 

For every example of a reinforcement based technique being misapplied and creating a mess, there is at least one example of a correction based technique that has been misapplied and created a mess for someone else.

 

All that really says is that a misapplied technique can make a mess.

 

(BTW, before you blame me for allowing the fence fighting to occur in the first place, I have a privacy fence, so I couldn't see the neighbor dog on the other side until it was too late. Actually, the fighting was so reinforcing to both dogs that they were fighting thru a solid 6 foot high privacy fence which was set back from a second chain link fence by about 4 feet.)

 

Blame? If you think I blame you for that, you don't know me well enough to make any assumptions about what I think about anything.

[Root Beer]

To add to blackdawg's assertion, I suggest Root beer, that you go to an open level sheepdog trial, and see the dogs, the MYRIAD dogs walking around in the morning, off leash, not causing problems, happy, (of course there will always be the odd one out) and behaving, and no treats/clickers anywhere in sight. Maybe, back to the original post, THIS is Voodoo......

 

And if my own dogs were in that mix, off leash, they would also be among the MYRIAD, not causing problems, happy, no clicker/treats in sight.

 

A couple of weeks ago they were off leash in a MYRIAD of pet and sport dogs and untrained pet dogs, all off leash, not causing problems, happy. No treats/clickers anywhere in sight.

 

Yet, my dogs, and a good many of the trained dogs there, were trained with clickers and treats.

 

I guess it's all Vodoo, then.

[kelpiegirl]

I guess that sums it up then. Maybe it is voodoo.

 

And if my own dogs were in that mix, off leash, they would also be among the MYRIAD, not causing problems, happy, no clicker/treats in sight.

 

A couple of weeks ago they were off leash in a MYRIAD of pet and sport dogs and untrained pet dogs, all off leash, not causing problems, happy. No treats/clickers anywhere in sight.

 

Yet, my dogs, and a good many of the trained dogs there, were trained with clickers and treats.

 

I guess it's all Vodoo, then.

[juliepoudrier]

All that really says is that a misapplied technique can make a mess.

Wow, and hasn't this been said in reference to any training method myriad times in this thread and others like it? And yet each time a thread like this comes up at least one group will denigrate the other by pointing out that the other group's methods achieve poor results or are unkind to the dog or similar? So which is it? Oh, I know, different methods suit different people and no one method** is inherently unproductive or unkind. (Truly abusive--pain causing--techniques excepted, of course.)

 

Groundhog Day, indeed.

 

============================

P.S. Kristine, I do wish you (and anyone else who's never been to a sheepdog trial and is close enough to come) would come to the sheepdog finals while it's in VA, since that shouldn't be too great a drive. I know you don't like sheep and have no desire to do that kind of work with your dogs, and I don't wish to prove anything, other than for you to see that the dogs involved are happy, well-adjusted animals, which would bely the cruelty you seem to assume goes hand-in-hand with correction-based training.

 

J.

[kelpiegirl]

Yes, do, Root beer. I still want to know how to get my dog not to pull...........................................

 

Groundhog Day, indeed.

 

P.S. Kristine, I do wish you'd (and anyone else who's never been to a sheepdog trial and is close enough to come) come to the sheepdog finals while it's in VA, since that shouldn't be too great a drive. I know you don't like sheep and have no desire to do that kind of work with your dogs, and I don't wish to prove anything, other than for you to see that the dogs involved are happy, well-adjusted animals, which would bely the cruelty you seem to assume goes hand-in-hand with correction-based training. J.

[Root Beer]

I guess that sums it up then. Maybe it is voodoo.

 

Or maybe it is the case that methods and approaches that some consider to be ineffective can, in fact, produce reliable and replicable results. And the fact that some consider them to be ineffective does not render them to be quasi-religious beliefs that result in confused and unhappy dogs.

 

Yes, Groundhog Day!! I was surprised by the fact that I liked that movie. :D I'm not a Bill Murray fan, either, but he was perfect for that part.

[Root Beer]

P.S. Kristine, I do wish you (and anyone else who's never been to a sheepdog trial and is close enough to come) would come to the sheepdog finals while it's in VA, since that shouldn't be too great a drive. I know you don't like sheep and have no desire to do that kind of work with your dogs, and I don't wish to prove anything, other than for you to see that the dogs involved are happy, well-adjusted animals, which would bely the cruelty you seem to assume goes hand-in-hand with correction-based training.

 

Thanks for the offer, but I have a Freestyle competition that weekend.

 

So, at that same time I will also see happy, well-adjusted animals, which would bely the creation of confused unhappy dogs that some seem to assume goes hand and hand with reinforcement based training.

[MicheleS.]

I attended exactly one sheepdog trial in Maryland a year or so back. I was truly impressed by every single dog I saw there. It was a completely different world to me, I've known nothing other than the obedience and the agility world. There was something very natural and very satisfying, I don't know if I'm using the right words for what I want to say, but I really loved being there and I didn't want to leave. I didn't see one dog pulling or lunging at the end of their leash, if they were even on a leash, some were not. Some dogs were sitting at the fence watching another dog's run, not barking, not out of control, just watching. Some were intently watching, some were relaxed watching. Some dogs were lounging on their owners' laps. Every single dog looked happy.

There was one man who was doing his run (sorry if I'm using the wrong terminology) and he got a little frustrated and rough with his dog while penning and was quickly reprimanded by the judge (I guess that was the judge?). A couple of folks who knew that I was at a trial for the very first time were also quick to come up to me to tell me that seeing that was not normal at all and they were genuinely disgusted by it. I can't remember exactly the situation, but I seem to remember he may have done some yelling and threatening body language or something.

When I attempted to see if Chase had anything for sheep, I absolutely looked forward to and loved being at the trainers sheep farm. The environment was relaxing, watching her work her dogs and try to work Chase was interesting and impressive. It's too bad Chase isn't cut out for herding because I would love to explore this more. Some day

[juliepoudrier]

Thanks for the offer, but I have a Freestyle competition that weekend.

 

So, at that same time I will also see happy, well-adjusted animals, which would bely the creation of confused unhappy dogs that some seem to assume goes hand and hand with reinforcement based training.

You know, I don't why I even bother. I'm not the one saying that your methods create unhappy dogs. In fact, if you were to look back over the gazillion related Groundhog Day posts you would likely find that I have *never* denigrated your training methods (others may have, but *I* have not; in fact, I've used *some* of those methods myself to good effect). All I've ever said in any of these threads is that people are mistaken if they think correction-based = punishment. I've said it in myriad ways, I'm sure, but that's basically my stance (and additionally why correction-based works for *my* situation). And yet, you have never afforded *me* the same courtesy. So when I ask you to come see something you swear doesn't exist, despite never having seen it, that still doesn't count as my saying you won't see it where you're going (even if you *choose* to interpet it that way). So, since you wouldn't want to go to a sheepdog trial and see that the methods I espouse don't create unhappy dogs, let me ask you this: I know that you teach or used to teach at a place where at least two sheepdog trialing folks also train. Are their dogs unhappy? Maladjusted? Abused? Punished unfairly? (If you would like to take this to PM, that's fine with me--I'm guessing the rest of the world doesn't care about this anyway.)

 

Oh, and I can't think of any reason to continuously parrot other people's comments unless the intent is to annoy them.

 

J.

[Journey]

Maybe the magic number should be 147

[NCStarkey]

Hi Michelle S,

 

Thank you for your input to this thread, and the "atmosphere" at a sheepdog trial is just as you described, a very pleasant place for both canines and humans to be.

 

I was at the same sheepdog trial that you referred to in your post, and the person that you saw getting rough with his dog at the pen was excused by the judge for his inappropriate behavior on the trial field. His tone was far too gruff, and he was using his stock stick in a threatening manner, so the judge ended his run. As you were told at the trial, this handler's behavior is extremely rare and totally unacceptable.

 

I would like to add to Julie's invitation for those who have never been to a sheepdog trial to please try to attend the 2010 National Sheepdog Finals at Belle Grove Plantation in VA. You will be amazed!

 

Regards,

nancy

 

PS: One thing that is thankfully absent at a sheepdog trial is the incessant barking that seems to be the norm at many dog sports venues.

[Root Beer]

You know, I don't why I even bother. I'm not the one saying that your methods create unhappy dogs. In fact, if you were to look back over the gazillion related Groundhog Day posts you would likely find that I have *never* denigrated your training methods (others may have, but *I* have not; in fact, I've used *some* of those methods myself to good effect).

 

No, you haven't said that, and I appreciate that.

 

All I've ever said in any of these threads is that people are mistaken if they think correction-based = punishment. I've said it in myriad ways, I'm sure, but that's basically my stance (and additionally why correction-based works for *my* situation). And yet, you have never afforded *me* the same courtesy. So when I ask you to come see something you swear doesn't exist, despite never having seen it, that still doesn't count as my saying you won't see it where you're going (even if you *choose* to interpet it that way). So, since you wouldn't want to go to a sheepdog trial and see that the methods I espouse don't create unhappy dogs, let me ask you this: I know that you teach or used to teach at a place where at least two sheepdog trialing folks also train. Are their dogs unhappy? Maladjusted? Abused? Punished unfairly? (If you would like to take this to PM, that's fine with me--I'm guessing the rest of the world doesn't care about this anyway.)

 

That has not even been the topic of this discussion. At least, not as I've read it. Yes, it was the topic over in the sister thread in the general section, but this thread has been about the charge that reinforcement based methods of training (aka to some "purely positive") is quasi-religious, vodoo, or rendered ineffective because of lack of a documented instance of an OTCH winner who uses those techniques.

 

And in that aspect of the discussion, we have agreed.

 

And the topic in this thread has also been whether or not an OTCH, or other high level visible championship of some sort is a necessary qualification in a trainer who is going to help a pet owner with a dog that has behavior issues.

 

And on aspect of the discussion, we have agreed.

 

My view of corrections have nothing to do with any of this. I have not made any statements, nor implications, about the behavior and mindset of dogs at sheepdog trials. I am genuinely glad that dogs at sheepdog trials are happy and I've never said that they are not.

 

And, for the record, I've been to a sheepdog trial. National Finals in Gettysburg several years ago. Watching the dogs work the sheep was very cool. But I didn't see any behavior from the dogs that were hanging around outside of the competition area that struck me as super amazing. Yes, dogs were hanging around being normal dogs. Guess what? That is not the only place in the world I've ever seen that.

 

My point is not to say there was something wrong with the sheepdog trial dogs.

 

Oh, and I can't think of any reason to continuously parrot other people's comments unless the intent is to annoy them.

 

You can choose to believe it or not, but my intention is not to annoy anyone. My intention is to take part in the discussion just like everyone else.

 

Honestly, I don't see why I should be expected to sit back and think "Oh yes! That's brilliant" when something that I know something about and have a true passion for is completely misrepresented.