This whole "dominate your dog" movement

[CoachRed]

Because we have recently adopted a Border/Aussie I have been spending a lot of time reading the Internet sites about training. We have always been dog people, but find it a definite help to study the SPECIFIC breed we have, and BC is definitely it's own breed! Similar to our Aussies, but kind of like Aussies on speed, LOL.

 

That said, a lot of what I am reading doesn't really sit that well with me or the way we have lived with our furbabies. They live WITH us as family, and not as 'possessions' and some of the training advice just seems overboard! Like never play tug with your dog. WTH? We always play tug, and they play it together. The sites say this sets up a 'competitive' role and is not good for your relationship as 'alpha'. Also there is a lot of talk about making the dog 'heel' for the entire walk, never walking ahead of you, always at your side or behind, and never venturing away from your side. Again WTH? What is the point of walking, hopefully not JUST the exercise. This should be an enjoyable time, and one of the biggest enjoyments they GET from this is sniffing even a blade of grass that has a good smell, LOL. At any rate, studying online is quite frustrating because of the attempt (it seems) to turn dogs into something you own and rule instead of a family member that is well behaved and happy.

 

Thoughts?

[Sue R]

If you use the "search" feature, you will find that "dominance" and "Cesar Milan" and similar approaches are not popular here. There is a lot more empathy for positive and practical, safe training methods.

[Smalahundur]

Also the training advice you describe would be pretty contra productive as a basis for stockwork training in my humble opinion.

[Root Beer]

That said, a lot of what I am reading doesn't really sit that well with me or the way we have lived with our furbabies. They live WITH us as family, and not as 'possessions' and some of the training advice just seems overboard! Like never play tug with your dog. WTH? We always play tug, and they play it together. The sites say this sets up a 'competitive' role and is not good for your relationship as 'alpha'. Also there is a lot of talk about making the dog 'heel' for the entire walk, never walking ahead of you, always at your side or behind, and never venturing away from your side. Again WTH? What is the point of walking, hopefully not JUST the exercise. This should be an enjoyable time, and one of the biggest enjoyments they GET from this is sniffing even a blade of grass that has a good smell, LOL. At any rate, studying online is quite frustrating because of the attempt (it seems) to turn dogs into something you own and rule instead of a family member that is well behaved and happy.

 

Thoughts?

 

It's nothing new. When we got our first dogs, the first info I found was dominance based. I "apha rolled" our first dog regularly - which was actually a gentle roll on the bed accompanied by a belly rub (best mis-interpretation EVER!!). I didn't let my husband play tug with him. (Now I consider tug to be an invaluable play skill!!)

 

Although I always rejected a lot of it, like not letting him walk out in front of me (that's where I want my dog when we walk!) or having to stay "above" him at all times. Who can live like that?

 

There are good sources of info out there that aren't dominance based. Try Patricia McConnell's blog, ClickerSolutions, or Karen Pryor's website (clickertraining.com).

 

Also, if you are interested in books, check out: Control Unleashed the Puppy Program, For the Love of a Dog (Patricia McConnell), The Power of Positive Dog Training (Pat Miller)

 

I'm with you - I don't do the dominance based stuff. Structure and discipline can be established, quite easily, without any of that.

[Smalahundur]

I "apha rolled" our first dog regularly - which was actually a gentle roll on the bed accompanied by a belly rub (best mis-interpretation EVER!!).

That "alpha roll" put a smile on my face...

[geonni banner]

A lot of people who used to advocate "alpha rolls" have abandoned that technique as counter productive even those of us who still use the occasional aversive. It's a great way to get bitten. How's that for "alpha"? It's also a great way to completely demoralize or destroy trust in a sensitive dog.

 

The only time I enforce the "me first" rule is at doorways or gates - especially if I don't know who or what is on the other side. Also it prevents the dog from walking into a bad situation. And it's polite. Otherwise, my dog can walk wherever she pleases in relation to me, unless I call her to heel.

[Maralynn]

I control the food, I make the toys come to life and every so often (read as long as they stay in the corner and don't disturb me) I allow them on my bed - that all seems to cement my alpha status quite nicely around here!

[Joe Anne]

As a Professional Pet Dog Trainer I agree 100% with another poster here..(Root Beer), about Patricia McConnel and Pat Miller. This is positive feedback /reward based training. That is the type of training I use with my clients and my dogs. That being said, with my new Border Collie puppy, Rose ...15 weeks old this coming week, I plan on laying off of too much obedience training as I want to have her thinking more and using HER brain, instead of me telling, or controlling her. I will work with her on good dog "manners", in our home and when we are out...but the advice I got from our herding trainer is...the only thing these BC's really need to learn is ...their name, a good recall, and proper discipline. I will however train for "leave it" ( could be a life saver) and a good "lie down". We will be working sheep at our handlers clinics several times a year, and hopefully some in between, the rest of what she needs to know will come naturally, as said above with proper guidance and discipline, and letting her just be a dog! The key really is "correct the wrong/ unwanted behavior" and appreciate the good behavior with gentle low key praise (if that is what you want to do)...Border Collies have the brain and ability to figure out a lot on their own with gentle and positive guidance .....we do not need to dominate them ..or any dog for that matter.

Be very careful about what you read about so called training methods, there is a LOT of bad advice out there.

I suggest sticking with most of the people on these boards who have successfully raised these awesome dogs and the above named (Patricia McConnel, Pat Miller) and others they suggest. Most of all enjoy your precious dog and have fun...even step back and observe what they can teach you! LOL!

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

I am certain there are people out there who still advocate "alpha rolls" and "dominance" but, in ten years of speaking with top traditional pet dog trainers I haven't met one. Even those who first advocated that theory (The Monks of New Skete/1978/working German Shepherds) have abandoned it.

 

In my recent experience, however, I've often heard "Positive" Trainers complaining about alpha rolls to contrast with their preferred methods, asking the question: "What would you rather do; abuse your dog and probably get bit or adopt Karen Pryor's behaviorism?"

 

Er . . .

 

A top traditional trainer once told me: "Border Collies are 'incident critical': they learn a mistake so quickly and repeat it three times to seal it into their memory before you can fix it."

 

This can be true. I've owned sheepdogs where a single badly applied harsh aversive has taken years to undo. I think that danger is multiplied by shock collars - the sheepdog is far more likely to forgive its handler's mistake than a powerful anonymous correction.

 

This danger doesn't exist with "positive" methods that (in extreme cases) won't use any aversives. In skilled hands such methods get okay results, in part because most pet dog owners don't ask much from their dogs. I've no doubt treats and easy praise are the very best way to teach dog tricks. "Traditional" trainers argue that "positive" methods can't produce as reliable a dog. I suspect this is true and one rarely sees such dogs earning advanced obedience titles but the jury is still out on that one.

 

In unskilled hands, "Positive" methods can create a baffled, unhappy dog. I've seen that too.

 

It isn't the method, it's the trainer. I've seen Pat Miller's happy well trained Lucy, Tricia McConnell's happy well trained Willy and Tony Ancheta (Koehler school)'s happy well trained Damien.

 

I've seen Cesar Milan work. He and Jack Knox have the most coherent, expressive "dog talk" body language I've ever seen.

 

Sheepdog training, expressing the dog's genetics with a willing dog is a different (in some ways easier/in some ways harder) set of issues and the "positive" vs "Traditional" arguments are irrelevant.

 

Donald McCaig

[Maralynn]

Actually sport dog trainers are embracing reward based methods over aversives because the finished product is better. Michael Ellis, Denise Fenzi and more. There is an extra spark and bounce to dogs trained primarily through reward based methods and this shows in perfomance events. If it didn't work people wouldn't use it.

[Smalahundur]

Aaand cue discussion positive training versus correction based.

Or one could take a dip in the forum´s archives and see that it has all been said. A couple of times.

[rlwzgd]

Aaand cue discussion positive training versus correction based.

Or one could take a dip in the forum´s archives and see that it has all been said. A couple of times.

 

Ha! This ^^

[5Bordercollies]

And it will probably be repeated another few times. I think that with so many more people starting to "see the light" so to speak that question will be asked another million times. Yes, everyone could go to the trouble of searching the forum archives, but most of the time it's not the first thing you think of... You have a question and it's easier to ask than to research. But OP don't feel bad, I also only saw the light about five years ago, my poor JRT were "scruffed", etc. Especially for chasing the cat. If I think today what I could have taught them with R+ training, not even to speak of that poor Black Lab we "inherited" with the farm. The two habits I could never break him of was breaking the yard fence to escape and chasing the cows and then when the turned on him, hiding behind the nearest human usually resulting in cow chasing human.

[Laurae]

I am certain there are people out there who still advocate "alpha rolls" and "dominance" but, in ten years of speaking with top traditional pet dog trainers I haven't met one.

 

Excellent clarification! But then saying

 

"positive" methods that (in extreme cases) won't use any aversives.

 

reveals a strong bias.

 

I don't know why the myth that positive trainers use no aversives at all persists, except to act as the same straw man alpha rolls provide, but I have never met any top positive trainer who uses no aversives at all. Arguments about the merits of both sides of this particular training coin are weakened when the same facts, repeatedly clarified, are consistently (and conveniently) ignored.

[Maralynn]

Personally I use about 90% reward based and 10% aversive. Works for me. I am truly baffled by the idea that trainers using primarily reward based training will not produce dogs that perform on the same level as those trained primarily with aversives. Ten years ago that was probably a valid thought. But now? There is quite a bit of evidence pointing to the fact that reward based training will also give excellent results with a performance dog. It is not at all a rare event these days.

[maggiesmommy]

I think aversives can be necessary for some dogs, especially very large and willful dogs. The obedience training school that we use (the same place where Maggie's taking agility classes now) uses mostly positive reinforcement but a dose of dominance-based behaviors like "alpha rolling" for certain dogs. I use mostly positive reinforcement but I also want to make it clear to Maggie that I'm in control and that challenging me isn't an option.

Maggie weighs 40 pounds and is pretty strong. I weigh 90 pounds and I'm extremely weak for an adult (health problems-- I don't recommend them). If I didn't initially train her as a puppy with pinch collars and alpha-rolling, it would be very easy for her to decide that she can walk all over me. I tried using an ordinary (non-choke, non-pinching) collar when she was a pup (and a good bit smaller than she is now) and every time she saw a bike that she wanted to herd, she would literally pull me over. When you've got a dog that is stronger than you are, you sometimes have to use aversives and dominance-based tactics... At least that's my experience. If anyone has a better alternative, I'd like to hear it.

[terrecar]

I suspect that many of the arguments across the web re: training methods, where a strawman is employed, have more to do with the arguer's need to be seen as a credible 'dog expert' than anything. I tend to steer clear of anyone who tells me how much they know about dogs, particularly by telling me how much someone else doesn't know. That is, unless they are offering something of real substance. Then I can ignore the posturing, but it is only slightly less annoying. Then again, most of the sound advice comes from those who are concerned with the dog and the results, not rigid methods and people politics.

 

I pick up tips from people here and elsewhere who give me suggestions/advice that both works and aligns with my ethics, and I discard the rest, regardless of the school of thought. Neither my pocketbook nor my self-image hinges on the need to be seen as a dog training 'expert', though dog training is one of my interests. So, I usually (obviously not always) stay out of the school-of-thought arguments. I get that brand management is good marketing for people who make a living at dog training. I just prefer an honest and fair representation of each side. The "dog abuser vs. ineffective coddler" paradigm is getting old.

Edited August 12, 2013 by terrecar

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

When I wrote . . ."positive" methods that (in extreme cases) won't use any aversives." Ms Laurae thought I exhibited bias.

 

Note my: ("in extreme cases"). I imagine that very few "positive" trainers never use an aversive. What I have seen in the real world is a common refusal to use aversives except in extremis and some guilt when an aversive must be used.

 

What counts as a correction and a reward is difficult to quantify. When a sheepdog stops listening so I run to him and call him off his sheep, I have given a stronger correction than calling him loud nasty names. The "positive" trainer who isn't getting desired results from his/her dog may unwittingly be showing disappointment more powerful than the offered treat.

 

The training I do - sheepdog training - is, I suppose - "reward based". Certainly it depends on the dog finding satisfaction working sheep. But in common parlance "reward based" tends to mean acceptance of behaviorist training theory, four quadrants, Karen Pryor and all that.

 

It is no easier to agree on "performance dog". Certainly most agility. many rally dogs and at least some demining dogs are trained with behaviorist methods. Most sleddogs, field trial bird dogs, retrievers, protection dogs, SAR and sheepdogs are not.

 

Donald McCaig

[mum24dog]

It is no easier to agree on "performance dog". Certainly most agility. many rally dogs and at least some demining dogs are trained with behaviorist methods. Most sleddogs, field trial bird dogs, retrievers, protection dogs, SAR and sheepdogs are not.

 

What are "behaviorist methods" in your eyes?

 

A behaviourist is just someone who understands the reasons behind why certain methods work and some don't, and why some work better than others. Since when did wanting to understand become a bad thing?

 

And the 4 quadrants of learning apply whether you are aware of it or not.

[terrecar]

To the original poster, I play tug with my dog and even (gasp!) let her win sometimes. Yet, when I am done and I say "give", she gives it up with no problem.

 

I also agree with you on the heel on walks. My dog does nice heel work, but we only do it for short periods. To insist on a precision heel during a walk is too much pressure on my dog and me. As long as my dog isn't pulling me down the road with the lead, i.e. she can walk on a loose lead, I'm happy. Our walks are for exercise and/or for taking time to smell the roses (or whatever else may be interesting).

 

I would rather be a benevolent leader than a martinet.

[Laurae]

What counts as a correction and a reward is difficult to quantify.

 

Exactly!

[Root Beer]

To the original poster, I play tug with my dog and even (gasp!) let her win sometimes. Yet, when I am done and I say "give", she gives it up with no problem.

 

I also agree with you on the heel on walks. My dog does nice heel work, but we only do it for short periods. To insist on a precision heel during a walk is too much pressure on my dog and me. As long as my dog isn't pulling me down the road with the lead, i.e. she can walk on a loose lead, I'm happy. Our walks are for exercise and/or for taking time to smell the roses (or whatever else may be interesting).

 

I'm the same on this. I let Dean "win" at tug all the time. He immediately brings the toy to me to beg for more of the game!

 

And I like to let my dogs "ride the leash" out ahead of me when they walk. The leash can be taut, but they are not pulling. I want to see them when we are walking. All can move in close to walk with me when asked. But I rarely ask on walks. Unless it's a training walk, but that is something altogether different.

 

One of the first things I had to teach Tessa when she came into my home was to go out a door ahead of me. She was terrified to go ahead of me. At first she could do it when she was sandwiched in among my four dogs. Gradually she got the confidence to shoot out ahead.

 

I often chucked at the thought that there are so many out there who consider such a thing unthinkable! I don't want to be going ahead of my dog all the time, for crying out loud! In fact, I often don't want to go out the door when I send them out to do their business. I want to open the door, have them go out while I stay in heated or air conditioned comfort, and come back after they are done or when I call them in!! Yes, of course, they are all trained to wait at the door if cued to do so, and hold the wait until released. I use that in situations where safety is a factor. But 99% of the time, I want the dog to go out ahead!

 

They walk ahead of me on walks, go out doors ahead of me, win at tug, sit higher than me, share my furniture and food, ask for things that they want in various ways, and are trained aversive-free.

 

I have yet to be put in a crate for the day while one of them drives off to take over my life . . .

[juliepoudrier]

MaggiesMommy,

Did you raise Maggie yourself? I don't object to pinch collars out of hand, but do wonder about using such things, or alpha rolls, etc., on a dog one has raised from puppyhood.

 

J.

[maggiesmommy]

MaggiesMommy,

Did you raise Maggie yourself? I don't object to pinch collars out of hand, but do wonder about using such things, or alpha rolls, etc., on a dog one has raised from puppyhood.

 

J.

 

She was 5 months old and completely untrained when I adopted her. So yes and no.

[Root Beer]

I tried using an ordinary (non-choke, non-pinching) collar when she was a pup (and a good bit smaller than she is now) and every time she saw a bike that she wanted to herd, she would literally pull me over. When you've got a dog that is stronger than you are, you sometimes have to use aversives and dominance-based tactics... At least that's my experience. If anyone has a better alternative, I'd like to hear it.

 

I do know an effective alternative. 1) Use of a front clip harness for management while the dog is in training (this can be phased out once the dog's training allows for it); 2) Use of the Look at That Game from Control Unleashed to create a calm response to seeing bikes moving by.

 

If you are interested in learning about that, maggiesmommy, I refer you to the book "Control Unleashed the Puppy Program". Even though your dog is no longer a puppy, the book is totally relevant to dogs of all ages.

 

Since you have some grounding in +R training to begin with, CU would probably help you hone your +R training skills and help you reduce use of aversives more than you might realize is possible right now.

 

There is a lot of cutting edge +R training methodology out there, with new techniques being developed all the time.

 

Just offering that since you directly asked for an alternative.