Even though we spend a lot of time studying, discussing, and dissecting learning theory and various training methods, the fact of the matter is, training dogs really isn't rocket science. It would be ludicrous to suggest that any one, specific training method is the only way or even the right way to train in terms of getting a dog to perform a certain behavior. However it would be equally ludicrous to suggest that the methods we use and manner in which we get a dog to perform a behavior is not going to have consequences and repercussions, not only to the dog, but to the relationship we have with him. I've always considered it my good fortune to have experienced the progression of dog training and to have utilized many different methods and tools. I started out training for competition during the widely accepted, compulsion exclusive, Koehler method days. Back then (and still today), it was all about getting the best, most crisp performance and reliability from your dog. Let me tell you, it worked. Still does. Today we have many alternate methods and less aversive tools available, and you know what, these tools and techniques work too. Choices are good. We all have to make that choice for ourselves. For me I base my choice on three factors, 1) which method and tools will have the least negative impact on the relationship I have with my dog, 2) does the means justify the end, and 3) how will I feel about myself after utilizing the particular tools/method?
I like to watch my dogs thinking and making choices. When they choose correctly, I (and I believe they) really feel triumphant! However I do teach that there are certain non-negotiable behaviors that a dog simply must comply with for safety reasons. "Leave It" is one of those. Although I teach the behavior using positive reinforcement, once the behavior is learned and practical application arises, I leave little room for choice. I deliver that cue much more sternly than most others. And should my dog ignore the cue and continue to try to get something potentially harmful to him, he will be stopped in his tracks by any means necessary. It could save his life. In this case, the means unarguably justifies the end. To get a perfect 200 in the obedience ring, not so much.
I can state unequivocally that the relationships I have with my dogs today are far deeper, more consistent, and much more mutually pleasurable than the relationships I had with my dogs back then. This is not only attributed to the training methods and tools I use, but moreso to the choices I've made in how I want to live my life with them, how I want them to view me, and at the end of the day, my desire to be able to look at myself in the mirror without wincing.
Recall
For me it's recalls. Also can be a life saver or keep an exhuberant dog from accidentally hurting someone. A dog that resource guards is another dog that I will limit their options with.
It is about life situations and not getting a 200 in the ring. Neither is exclusive of the other. You can have a "ring trained" dog that can't cope once they get out of the ring. They may even be pulling, tugging, and lunging as they leave the ring.
If it does not translate to the dog's real life, it doesn't do any good. That being said, care on the handler's part to perfect moves and practice the repetitions can turn to not only good performance on the dog's part, but a real understanding of the language between handler/owner/trainer and dog. It's a beautiful thing when both are working together into a wonderful partnership.
It also provides for much more freedom for the dog, and better activities to enjoy together. Training is not rocket science, but it is a responsibility in owning a dog that too many people treat loosely without thoughts for the future.
For instance, I just got some sad news that a neighborhood dog, a lab, with minimal training was put to sleep. He had no reliable recall, and took a jogger as an intruder. At this point, no one had a choice in the fate of the dog, and of course all our sympathies go to the jogger. However, this sort of thing is very possible to be avoided by excellent training and awareness on the owner's part.
Sadly, many of the human population are not up to the responsibility. How you get there isn't really the question, but the answer is that you do get there or don't own that dog. By the way, this dog had no bite history whatsoever. Probably just wasn't prepared for the situation that he found himself in nor trained to respond to the owner when called under distracting circumstances. Or alternatively, leashed up if that training was not done. However, certain breeds are totally able to pull their owners away. Having a leashed dog is not instead of training them at least to leash level.
Maurice Peaches
All Good Doggies
Non-negotiables
For me, recalls are a little different. Though reliable recalls are certainly desirable and are definitely a safety issue, it's difficult to teach it any other way than positively and happily. The dog is going to have a choice if he is off lead, there's no way avoiding that, but our challenge is making sure that choosing us is a no brainer. How can we do that by using aversives?
Just Do It
As Nike says, you just do it. You train the dog to recall period. I am not talking about methods here.
Use what you wish. You are saying you use aversives for Leave It? Just trade the dog with a yummy treat, would seem to do the trick. How do you train a dog to trust you, and out his beloved treasure with aversives?
I guess I don't understand the question, or why you would have it?
Maurice Peaches
All Good Doggies
Back to my original point
I think I may have misunderstood your post too. My original point was that for me the means must justify the end in regards to getting compliance. For example, with "leave it," I said above that I teach the behavior strictly with positive reinforcement. However once the behavior is learned, it's important to have complete compliance, and if that means I need to be a little more harsh in ensuring that compliance, so be it. I admit that I deliver the "leave it" cue in a much firmer tone than any other cue. The means definitely justifies the end, IMO. Recalls pose a completely different scenario for me. My cues are always the same, happy, up beat, downright giddy. And if there is urgency in the situation, I'll get even giddier and sillier for compliance. For me, becoming firmer or harsher wouldn't work in this case.