UnderGround Forums
 

PetGround >> just finished basic obedience class


11/10/08 6:37 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
NorthFromHere
309 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/4/07
Posts: 4733
I'm not trying to humanize dogs here, but would you be willing to use Koehler's method to train little kids, that aren't developed enought to understand reasoning, to make the desired choices? If not, why is that?

If Koehler's method is so superior to everything else, why is clicker training widely considered as the most effective animal, not just dog, training method?

By the way, what training method does Disney use now?
LOL
11/10/08 7:16 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/10/08 7:17 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9979
NorthFromHere - I'm not trying to humanize dogs here, but would you be willing to use Koehler's method to train little kids, that aren't developed enought to understand reasoning, to make the desired choices? If not, why is that?

If Koehler's method is so superior to everything else, why is clicker training widely considered as the most effective animal, not just dog, training method?

By the way, what training method does Disney use now?
LOL
1) Not into anthropomorphism. But even so, how would you suggest a child with minimal cognitive reasoning be 'trained', or more accurately, learn certain behaviors? A slap on the hand when the child reaches for something it shouldn't or acts aggressively is not only effective, it's warranted. Pain and stress are basic impulses virtually every living thing is equipped with, by desgin. Not sure about amoebas and shit, but you get my point. Triggering nerve endings carries a message to the brain that initiates a set response. Touch a hot stove and your hand instanteously jerks backwards(unless you're a masochist!). Even a barely cognitive child reacts the same way, so it stands to reason its a suitable tool. 

Look at Helen Keller and the movie The Miracle Worker. Granted, Keller was far from being a drooling idiot, but being blind, deaf and mute, no one had any way of knowing that until attempts were made to help her. And how did they accomplish it? Through basic sensations as touch and impulses such as pain. When a spoiled Keller acted out in frustration or self pity, how was she corrected? The teacher slapped that little bitch in the mouth! And did Keller become damaged goods? Nope!


2) Clicker training is most certainly NOT considered such. Just look at Monty Roberts work as the Horse Whisperer. Does he not utilize threat responses in prey animals to train them? Is that not a form of aversive training? Is he not widely considered the best horse trainer in the world, able to address problems everyone else says are impossible?

Stop listening to the Animal Rights groups and those fragile individuals advocating spay/neutering as 'training'. Read Koehler, talk to people who rely on dogs for a living(ie: K-9 handlers, disaster SAR people), then get out there and test everything under real conditions...ie: not a cute training facility or research labratory. You might just surprise yourself!


3) Not Koehler, he died in 1993. But, why don't you ask them how they view him and his Disney legacy?
  
11/10/08 7:50 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
NorthFromHere
309 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/4/07
Posts: 4734
"Just look at Monty Roberts work as the Horse Whisperer. Does he not utilize threat responses in prey animals to train them? Is that not a form of aversive training? Is he not widely considered the best horse trainer in the world, able to address problems everyone else says are impossible?"

I went to Monty's seminar last April. I got the impression that he doesn't use physical violence like drowning or choking to train horses.

"Read Koehler, talk to people who rely on dogs for a living(ie: K-9 handlers, disaster SAR people), then get out there and test everything under real conditions"

What real conditions? Normal everyday life is a real condition for 99,99% of the dogs. Aggressive confrontations etc are not "real conditions" for the vast majority of dogs. I think you're way too deep into the protection/guard dog training mentality to see the needs of an average dog owner.

"why don't you ask them how they view him and his Disney legacy? "

Don't know about Disney's current view on Koehler, but they use clicker training now. And Koehler's legacy is the most critized training method ever.
11/10/08 8:45 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9980
NorthFromHere - "Just look at Monty Roberts work as the Horse Whisperer. Does he not utilize threat responses in prey animals to train them? Is that not a form of aversive training? Is he not widely considered the best horse trainer in the world, able to address problems everyone else says are impossible?"

I went to Monty's seminar last April. I got the impression that he doesn't use physical violence like drowning or choking to train horses.

"Read Koehler, talk to people who rely on dogs for a living(ie: K-9 handlers, disaster SAR people), then get out there and test everything under real conditions"

What real conditions? Normal everyday life is a real condition for 99,99% of the dogs. Aggressive confrontations etc are not "real conditions" for the vast majority of dogs. I think you're way too deep into the protection/guard dog training mentality to see the needs of an average dog owner.

"why don't you ask them how they view him and his Disney legacy? "

Don't know about Disney's current view on Koehler, but they use clicker training now. And Koehler's legacy is the most critized training method ever.

1) Now you're making a distinction between aversion and physical violence? Are both not stressing and potentially harmful? Even so, ask him what he might do if suddenly put placed into a dangerous situation with a horse...such as a charge? Would he bribe it with sugar cubes or do what he must to protect himself and get control of the horse?

btw, Koehler never advocated severe corrections as a primary training aide. Such extremes were used as a last ditch effort to keep the small percentage of truly incorrigible dogs from being euthanized. Yet, like virtually every Koehler 'critic', you keep insisting that this is not the case by nit-picking the smallest detail as overwhelming evidence of the method's cruelty. Is it ignorance or malice?

2) True, everyday life is are very much real conditions. A an exuberant pup trained with clickers refusing to recall at a dog park because it's 'just sooooo excited' or 'too young to understand' is an example. So is a dog bolting to its death in the street despite clicker training because it was pushed into flight by noise, an aggressive animal, or some idiot trying to scare it during a walk or game of frisbee in the front yard. 

But I'm too deeply involved in a particular vocation for my views to be applicable, huh? Yeah, providing people with an vehicle towards immediate and lasting control over their dogs, as well as increased understaning of canine behavior is more or less worthless. Gotcha!  *sigh*

3)  Can't strengthen your position with an argument you don't have the answer to. Sorry! But no, Koehler nor his Disney legacy are the most criticized methods ever. It was only recently that any substantial numbers of misinformed yokels began to speak out against Koehler and similar methods. Prior to that people trained their dogs to great success using such methods and Koehler was heralded as a genius. Again, there's a reason why he was put in charge of the Army K-9 Corps and animal training at Disney studios, as well as why you're unable to refute his method via an example of similar achievement using non-aversive methods. And you never will...
 

11/10/08 9:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9981

More than anything, why don't you take a look at the Koehler Method thread that's on this forum? There's an example of your average everyday 'pet' dog, a husky(pedigreed, I'm sure!), trained by a nerdy doctor from asia with no ties to protection or other 'serious' work.

Is the dog under control? Is he using harsh methods? And most importantly, does the dog look frightened or otherwise unhappy?

Honest answers to those questions should nulify your objections.

 

11/10/08 10:43 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/10/08 10:54 AM
Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9525
" So again I ask, what's the logic in bribery versus say, proper training? "

"Why not just praise from the start" is a pretty weak answer. Whats the difference if i get the same result consistently?  to me, none. for all intents and purposes that this dog will encounter in its lifetime, none. The food makes for an easier transition, thats it.

Also, using food as an aid to bond with dogs can be very effective.

11/10/08 9:57 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9984
 It's only 'weak' because you can't provide any logical answer as to why you switch methods in the long run. It's alright to admit you do it because you don't know how to instill obedience and end up with a handler driven dog. No one does at first. I started out baiting dogs, too. The difference being that I kept an open mind, didn't object at every step of the road(yes, I know this applies to another thread, so stfu! lol), and eventually learned how to train dogs. You(and others) will get there as well if you give it a chance.

as an aid does not equal bonding. It's nothing more then luring the dog into compliance...as has been stated numerous times!  ;o)
11/11/08 12:38 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/11/08 12:39 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9990

Something else to think about...

Ever watch that South African(iirc) dude who works with/rescues Chimpanzees? He uses aversive methods to establish his authority/dominance over certain individuals...ie: those lower in the pecking order then him. He responds to their challenges(when they punch or throw stuff at him) via physical restraint...ie: pinning them to the ground until they submit(an 'alpha roll' in dog training).

What's more is that people who train big cats, like lions and tigers, are not opposed to using physical force to keep the animals in check, even though they're dealing with predators that can easily kill them. I'm sure I'm not the only person who's seen zookeepers(correct term?) pop a cat in the nose when they're getting a little too froggy. So why do it? Because, again, physically imposing authority/dominance is the most communicative and effective means of establishing order in nature, and in dog training. There's no denying this, yet it doesn't stop people from ignoring reality in defense of their agendas(ie: PETA) as they lob empty accusations.

Then why bring this up? Because the statement that non-aversive methods are the standard of animal training across the board is not an accurate representation of the facts. And neither does the use of aversion in training cause lasting distress/damage to an animal's psyche when properly implemented. Like anything, the key is knowing wtf you're doing and holding yourself and others accountable when methods are misused...ie: too much force = abuse/ not enough force = kindness as cruelty.

 
11/11/08 9:16 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9539
 to me its not switching methods though, it is a method. one that is very widely used with great success. My dog isnt thinking about food when i put her in a down stay and walk out of the room or when i have her sit at every street corner.

I should clarify, when bonding with dogs using food i was referring to stuff like hand feeding and not  letting a dog dive into her bowl until you release her type of stuff.
11/18/08 2:17 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10159
 An interesting read for those extolling the benefits of purely positive training: http://www.pitbullforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=106868







/trollish sarcasm.
11/18/08 9:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9581
 who here is into the purely positive??

btw that poster is a total newb to the apbt if i recall correctly
11/18/08 6:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10177
 Have you not been reading this thread? NorthFromHere is like one of those AR's people who mourn the cutting down of trees. Him and his clicker training want to take over the world! haha.


But I'm not just talking about the OP on that thread. Do you not see the standard theme there that I've been talking about? As in the 'he's just soooo excited he can't help himself' bit? Rather then do what's required to instill lasting obedience in ALL situations, they resort to spray bottles and saying the dog/pup just doesn't know any better? Come on, bro! You know what's up...




btw, go read my agility thread. Actually surprised me it didn't turn into something trollish. lol
11/20/08 3:38 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
NorthFromHere
309 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/4/07
Posts: 4854
smileythai - Have you not been reading this thread? NorthFromHere is like one of those AR's people who mourn the cutting down of trees. Him and his clicker training want to take over the world! haha.


So I'm a hippie tree hugger, because I do not want to correct my animals with physical pain?

Actually I did some timberwork last weekend and cut down about 30 trees from my forest.

Why are you so passionately against every training method other than Koehlers?
11/20/08 3:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10264
NorthFromHere - 

So I'm a hippie tree hugger, because I do not want to correct my animals with physical pain?

Actually I did some timberwork last weekend and cut down about 30 trees from my forest.

Why are you so passionately against every training method other than Koehlers?
Honestly, I don't lose any sleep over the methods people use as long as they produce reliable control. The problem, though, is that people such as yourself, who advocate purely positive methods do so because a) you're pushing a social agenda as opposed to dog training, and b) you let that agenda overshadow the inadequacy of the method used. Meaning, purely positive training has repeatedly shown to be unreliable at best, and a complete liability at worst. 

So when you ask me an inane question like why I'm passionate about Koehler(even though I utilize a more advanced method) I have to laugh. Asking why I support a method that's proven reliable for tens of thousands of dogs(of all breeds, sizes, and vocations) for nearly half a century is like asking why people train jiu-jitsu or muay thai...because it works, period! LOL

 
11/20/08 5:18 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
NorthFromHere
309 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/20/08 5:18 AM
Member Since: 1/4/07
Posts: 4855
"So when you ask me an inane question like why I'm passionate about Koehler"

I didn't ask that. I asked, why are you so passionately against every training method other than Koehlers?

"Asking why I support a method that's proven reliable for tens of thousands of dogs(of all breeds, sizes, and vocations) for nearly half a century is like asking why people train jiu-jitsu or muay thai...because it works, period!"

I've trained MT, BJJ and MMA for over 15 years, but it doesn't mean I would be foolish enough to laugh at arts like judo or greco wrestling. That would be moronic.
11/20/08 5:52 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10272
NorthFromHere - "So when you ask me an inane question like why I'm passionate about Koehler"

I didn't ask that. I asked, why are you so passionately against every training method other than Koehlers?

"Asking why I support a method that's proven reliable for tens of thousands of dogs(of all breeds, sizes, and vocations) for nearly half a century is like asking why people train jiu-jitsu or muay thai...because it works, period!"

I've trained MT, BJJ and MMA for over 15 years, but it doesn't mean I would be foolish enough to laugh at arts like judo or greco wrestling. That would be moronic.
1) Regardless of how you word your question the answer remains the same. One method works, the others fail. Pretty simple. 
 
2) Convenient how you attempt to strengthen your argument(ie: purely positive training works, too!) by using my logic. Why aren't you foolish enough to laugh at stand alone arts like TKD, Aikido, and the like? Because their usefulness under pressure is suspect(ie: unreliable)??
11/20/08 8:12 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
NorthFromHere
309 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/4/07
Posts: 4861
If you believe clicker training is "purely positive", you don't know shit about it. Clicker trainers use aversives like extinction and negative punishment.
11/20/08 8:14 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10274

Quit while you're behind, okay?

11/20/08 10:13 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9589
"One method works, the others fail"

this statement implies that you know not only every other training method but the results of them as well. stick to your argument about Koehler being a good method for most dogs.

I really kinda question whether or not you have handled overly sensitive dogs and dogs with serious behavioral and or trust issues. I refuse to believe that you could look at every dog out there, like the ones i referred to, and reasonably say that jerking them around on a leash is a good idea. I'm not knocking Koehler - the method is great for a pretty wide range of dogs but certainly not all.

Sure all dogs may be wired the same, save some breed specific traits but there are other factors that go into the development of a dogs "personality" (dont accuse me of anthropromorphism!). Saying that one single (and pretty specific) method is a one size fits all for EVERY dog out there is a little too much for me to swallow. I base my opinions on my experiences and i take everything i read (including koehler) with a grain of salt. and lately, I've had a lot of experiences with dogs (almost all of which i have used koehler on for walking on the leash).

Thre resiliency and adaptability of a dog that makes them an excellent working companion are also the traits that enable them to successfully accept different training methods that are not as "natural" as koehler. Dogs themselves are not natural animals, they are our own creation and shaped by us. what we want to work on them eventually will.
11/20/08 12:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9594
c'mon i'm waiting for my verbal lashing..
11/20/08 9:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10275
Are behavioral problems a modern invention? Because I really don't understand why it's so hard to accept. The method speaks for itself, and has done so for far longer then newer fad methods have been around to fail.

But seriously, are you an expert on behavioral issues, Mike? Do you understanded that virtually no dog is damaged beyond repair, and that the majority of behavioral problems stem from poor discipline and weak handling rather then an excess of either?

Watch the compulsion videos if you haven't already. Do you not see behaviors commonly viewed as fear, weak nerves, and signs of abuse by the purely positive crowd...ie: raised hackles, tucked tail, yelping?? As stated before(though I can't remember if on this thread or not) that shit is a manipulative ploy by a dog to resist discipline 90% of the time, not a sign of it having prior 'damage' made worse by proper training.

Yet you're sure I haven't worked with the sad cases you've seen at the shelters. Fine. That's your call. But know that you take that position only because what I say conflicts with your leanings towards the purely positive and that which you don't want me to accuse you of. Oh! But you've read and 'used' Koehler, right? Even though you admittedly self-sabotage the method(ie: taking the prong off too early in training) in order to project an artificial equality between methods? It's okay, I'll let that slide. 

Nonetheless I've owned and worked with the kind of dogs you're suggesting don't benefit from Koehler. And what I've found through experience is that Koehler is infiintely more effective at resolving issues via accountability then bribery and zero consequences. Whether I cite my own 'rescues' that cowered and pissed themselves prior to proper training(when I was still using food bribes) or the Dobie I worked with that whined like a banshee when introduced to the prong, the results were the same...behavioral issues disappear when the dog is introduced to discipline. But how? And why? Because spoiled dogs react to effective leadership and 'damaged' dogs grow in confidence(as Koehler so eloquently describes in his book...which you've read, right? lol) the more they learn the consequences of good and bad decision making...ie: obedience = comfort and praise/disobedience = discomfort and distress.






11/21/08 9:34 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MikeZev
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/15/02
Posts: 9598
"But seriously, are you an expert on behavioral issues, Mike? Do you understanded that virtually no dog is damaged beyond repair, and that the majority of behavioral problems stem from poor discipline and weak handling rather then an excess of either? "

you know my answer to this passage. to the latter question, I'd say that i have personally never seen a case where a dog was damaged through discipline and competent handling.


"that shit is a manipulative ploy by a dog to resist discipline 90% of the time, not a sign of it having prior 'damage' made worse by proper training."

I agree! again i'm not accusing koehlers method of producing these dogs just pointing out its inefficiency and potentially counterproductive effects in that other 10%.


"Yet you're sure I haven't worked with the sad cases you've seen at the shelters. Fine. That's your call. But know that you take that position only because what I say conflicts with your leanings towards the purely positive and that which you don't want me to accuse you of. Oh! But you've read and 'used' Koehler, right? Even though you admittedly self-sabotage the method"

No matter which buttons i push you always respond with an answer. I'll get you one day. Sure, its partially opinion on my part but not because of loyalty to one method over another - I'll use anything that I think will work and that will get me and the dog to the desired, consistent behavior with as little resistence along the way as possible. And I only took the prong off sicily to get her used to the flat collar for the TDI eval. when i take the dogs out now she wears it.


yes, i have read koehler and i have the attitude i have about it (torn) for a couple reasons: example - when he talks about training a fence charger his first suggestion is to shoot the dog with a slingshot from inside the house or a covered position (c'mon, seriously!)then in the next paragraph he suggests the genius idea of attaching a drag to the dog! why not use a method that a dog will immediately understand and constantly be reminded of (a drag) and not bother with shooting the dog which could agitate and confuse him??

As far as damaged dogs go, i just dont understand how you could look at one and think aversives are the right way to start training. maybe we are talking about different kinds of damaged.
11/21/08 10:16 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10298
MikeZev - No matter which buttons i push you always respond with an answer. I'll get you one day.
LOL, didn't even notice I was being baited. How shitty do I feel?





Gotta go out and beg for work and/or pocket change now so I'll have to look at this in more depth later on. For now I'll leave you with this thought. There's no question Koehler works, but at the same time it's very basic in terms of communication between dog and handler, especially when compared to the method I utilize in my own training(though I admit I'm still a student to it). Understanding Koehler is like getting your bluebelt in jiu-jitsu. It's a big step, no doubt, and it gives you a lot of options. But it's merely a doorway to a whole other realm of practical application and understanding. This training is no different. There's so much available to a handler beyond the physical corrections of a prong that it's actually hard to verbalize. An example, just learning a read a dog as it perceives/interacts with the world around it(without you clummsily disturbing the balance) is an art unto itself. It's something that ties into every other facet of the training because the calmness of mind and body that allows you to observe a dog like that becomes a permanent part of your relationship that transfer's down through the lead in times/situations of stress.

I'm sure you can imagine how beneficial this sort of thing can be applied to 'damaged' dogs with behavioral issues of all types, can't you? If not, don't worry, I'll be back...   haha!
11/22/08 5:54 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smileythai
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10305
you know my answer to this passage. to the latter question, I'd say that i have personally never seen a case where a dog was damaged through discipline and competent handling.  

Then where does the comment below originate?

just pointing out its inefficiency and potentially counterproductive effects in that other 10%.


If discipline and competent handling does not, in your experience, damage dogs, then why would you assume problem dogs would be made worse? Do the rules on dog behavior suddenly change when abuse or neglect are introduced?

Sure, its partially opinion on my part but not because of loyalty to one method over another - I'll use anything that I think will work and that will get me and the dog to the desired, consistent behavior with as little resistence along the way as possible. And I only took the prong off sicily to get her used to the flat collar for the TDI eval. when i take the dogs out now she wears it.

As I've said before mixing methods is counterproductive. Having made the choice to use Koehler as a method you had a responsibility to follow the program to the letter...per the book's introduction...rather then to pick and choose the methods and timing you did not find objectionable. Had you followed the program to completion there would be no need for a 'getting used to it" period of transitioning from one collar to the next because Sicily would already be beyond the point of challenging your authority via the prong and slack lead.

yes, i have read koehler and i have the attitude i have about it (torn) for a couple reasons: example - when he talks about training a fence charger his first suggestion is to shoot the dog with a slingshot from inside the house or a covered position (c'mon, seriously!)then in the next paragraph he suggests the genius idea of attaching a drag to the dog! why not use a method that a dog will immediately understand and constantly be reminded of (a drag) and not bother with shooting the dog which could agitate and confuse him??

Mike, you're forgetting(ignoring?) a couple of things here. First, does Koehler not state emphaticially the method itself(training program) typically eliminates the need for problem solving in all but the worst dogs? And that the association between behavior and consequence must leave a lasting impression on the dog if it's to be effective?

While seemingly barbaric, the advantage of tactics such as the throw chain and slingshot are the dog's association of its behavior not being confused with the correction. The fact that it gets tagged everytime it charges a fence aggressively is the most direct and effective solution to the problem because the dog learns, "damn, I don't like getting tagged in the ass. I think I'll stop acting like a moron because Mike's gonna catch me everytime anyway".

Now compare the above experience to something like the drag line and you get an idea for what Koehler's doing. His primary solution works 100% of the time, but he's also giving the handler options depending on the severity of the problem they're faced with...ie: how much of a hardass dog they have.

However, with a hardass dog, the effectiveness of something like the drag line will be less reliable then say, the slignshot or throw chain. Why? Because as I'm sure you're already aware, some dogs actually like dragging shit around, and no amount of haphazard discomfort they're already aware of(ie: the wood chunk they drag around all day smacking them in the legs or ass) is really going to discourage or cause an association between the behavior and consequences in hardass dogs. Instead, the dog eithe learns "damn, this drag line is cool, if I move quick enough I don't get smacked by the wood chunk", or "damn, this drag line is annoying, but screw Mike if he thinks it's gonna stop me!".

 That's why the techniques are ordered the way they are in the book. Koehler took into account the differences in temperament and tolerances between breeds, as well as the limitations of the written word...ie: he knew no signle breed or service(job) niche was going to be reading his book(s) so the focus is on the most effective solutions(speed + reliability), while still giving handlers dominion over the appropriateness of each technique for their dogs.

Don't really know why I have to explain any of this, though, as Koehler makes mention of it in the book...which you've read, right?   haha!

As far as damaged dogs go, i just dont understand how you could look at one and think aversives are the right way to start training. maybe we are talking about different kinds of damaged.

You and I define 'damage' differently. In most cases(re: 90%) I see the effects of anthropomorphism and poor handling. But even in the cases where a dog is legitimately affected by abuse and neglect, utilization of discipline and proper handling are not detrimental to the dog's rehabilitation. However, that statement doesn't automatically translate as immediately reaching for the prong and lead. No, just as one builds a bond with pups, waiting until they follow the handler around like a shadow before training commences, so to is a bond and trust formed between the handler and the 'damaged' dog. How else can obedience be instilled in a if the alternative to corrections(discomfort/distress), which are comfort and praise, cannot be trusted as being sincere? The dog will have no reason to comply, instead it will submit to terror via completely shutting down(ie: cowering in place, urinating, etc).
10/16/11 4:25 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
rls99
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 10/16/11 4:26 PM
Member Since: 7/19/05
Posts: 131
First off, I would like to say that I am totally unqualified to comment intelligently on this topic. But, since that hasn't stopped me in the past, I'll chime in. For the average dog owner, who is looking for minimal obedience training for his average dog, positive training is the way to go. However, if the dog is a capable one, or will be a working dog, some aversion training is necessary. When my little girl was just a couple of month old, she would try to pull into the street during our walks because that is where the action is. She then came to realize that treats were not associated with the street and stopped trying to pull there. Now, she is seventy four pounds at seven months. If she attempted to bolt into the street (I don't let her off leash yet), you are damn right some punishment will be in order. This has nothing to do with abusing the dog, and everything about preventing life endangering behavior.<br />I have never read the Kohler method, but I intend to soon. All training to this point has been positive, and hopefully I can keep it that way. But, at least 99% recall is a must, and I don't think positive training will get my dog and I there.<br />Now, tell me I know nothing, and you will be right.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.