I Wish We Could All Get Along

I agree that it doesn't help to overstate things, but then I'm confused by the examples you use to make that point. Yes, martingales can cause pain if used to stop pulling on leash. but often they are the best choice for dogs like Greyhounds who have heads smaller than their necks. I use one on my dog not to stop him pulling on leash, but to prevent his small head from coming free of the collar that's fitted for his larger neck. You can fit them correctly so that they do not tighten to the point of discomfort. So, unlike a shock collar, they have a benign use. Head halters: most positive trainers I know acknowledge they can be aversive to some (many? most?) dogs and recommend against them for those dogs (some even recommend against them for all dogs). Not all no-pull harness work using pressure on the chest or armpits. Finally, that some people over crate does not make crates aversive. By that definition, anything could be aversive.

Hi Sue,

I agree with your points.  I am not saying that "martingales are aversive" - I am specifically discussing those who try to state that those and other tools simply are *not* aversive at all.  I respect and understand why you are using the martingale with your dog.  They are a great tool!

Of course you're right that just because some people over=crate does not make all crates aversive.  That is somewhat my point:  there is no use in picking out the tools that one thinks are nonaversive and vilifying all others! I am also speaking to a very certain group of trainers when discussing those tools:  those who claim that those tools are fine to use because they do *not* cause "pain".

But, I do think some "tools" are aversive by design. Shock collars for instance. It frustrates me to no end when someone says they don't hurt because they tried it on themselves. If they did not hurt, then why not use a non-shock collar. Maybe there's some dog out there who enjoys being shocked. but I doubt it. 

But, I do think it's important to realize that any tool can be aversive depending on the dog. I tried a head halter on my dog when they first came out and he just shut down. I was told--by positive trainers--that I was doing something wrong, hadn't fitted it correctly, etc. In reality, he just hated it. So, I stopped using it. 

I like the spirit of the article Valerie, and I've been thinking of blogging something similar myself.  I no longer jump into arguments based on immediate emotive reaction.  Of course there are tools and techniques out there that are abhorrent to me, but I've decided to simply get on with using my energies in promoting the practices that I believe in and not run around wasting those energies adding fuel to the arguments.   Life is just too short and I have too many dogs to help!

~Jaq~ www.dogpsyche.co.uk

Good post! 

When discussions over methods start, people can start getting mean. Since we're all trying to help dogs and humans living long and successful lives together, we need to be at least as kind to other people as we try to be to dogs.

I also try to use the most positive and gentle methods with my puppy. But when she starting getting too aggressive with her biting at 10 weeks old, I found the loud yelp I gave had no effect. The same with trying to divert her attention to something more suitable. 

I finally had to knit my eyebrows and give a little growl to get her attention. Yep, I'm sure it was aversive. And unpleasant enough to work. Also, not my first choice. But it's more important to have a dog that knows that hard bites are not acceptable in play.

Oh, and I haven't had to growl in weeks. At 13 weeks, she's back to a soft mouth and knows not to tug or pull on me with her teeth.

Pamela  http://somethingwagging.wordpress.com

Such wise words!  It really is basically useless to engage in the endless arguments that do become so emotional.  That is why I just wanted to state my thoughts and be done with it (sort of).  I actually applaud those who try their best to be the least aversive - and there are definitely tools and methods that are abhorrent no matter which way you look at it - but who is the one qualified to make the rules when it comes to everyone and everything else?  There are extremists in every camp, and extremists have a way of being very inflammatory and definitely are one of my personal triggers.

You make some interesting points, and I certainly agree with you that no training tool should be used only because everyone "assumes" it is humane and it is currently "fashionable."  At the least we need to keep our eyes and ears open for signs that these implements could be causing harm and be prepared to support more research as to which of the various "dog walking devices" that are available to help clients walk unruly dogs (while they are hopefully being trained so they can be weaned off these devices) are safest and most comfortable for different dogs.

But I do not completely agree with your statement that trends have come and gone and so the pendulum will likely swing back the other way. It is true that fads come and go in all walks of life, but if you are an expert who is recommending methods of childrearing or dog training, then "whatever is currently fashionable" should not figure into the recommendations you make to your clients.  You should be basing your methods and recommendations on the best scientific data currently available.  In fact, research over the past several decades has suggested that spanking kids does more harm than good and increases the risk of child abuse, and the overwhelming majority of professional organizations promoting child health and welfare oppose spanking on these grounds. Professionals have not been waffling on this issue in recent decades and approval for spanking has been slowly declining with even the general public over the past 40 years or so.

Of course, dog training is lagging way behind child behavior in terms of research and funding, so there are many gaps in our knowledge.  But scientific evidence is accumulating that methods that emphasize positive reinforcement and avoid positive punishment are at least as effective, less stressful for the dogs and safer for human and dog alike than using "aversive based" methods. It is possible that new scientific data could come along in the future and turn decades of research into child psychology and/or animal behavior on their heads, but in the meantime, a competent and ethical professional (whether a child psychologist or a dog trainer) will strive to use and recommend methods  that are best supported by the preponderance of scientific data.  In the absence of absolute knowledge, the professional should use and recommend methods that have at least been shown to "do the least possible harm" of the available options.  Whether or not something is "currently fashionable" should not come into it at all.

I agree with you that people should be civil and polite to one another.  Once someone is on the defensive, they will not be able to learn from you.  But people also have to be able to differentiate between criticism aimed at their methods from an attack on them personally.  And some people have no desire to learn from anyone, no matter how tactful.  It is very frustrating to run across someone who calls him or herself a professional dog trainer who refuses to admit that they need to learn new ways of doing things and even brags about his or her inflexibility.  Would you choose to patronize a doctor who bragged about the fact that he didn't belong to any professional associations, don't go to any meetings and don't read any medical journals because "he's treated throusands of patients over the past 30 years and doesn't need any science geeks telling him what is good medicine?"  Then why is this attitude tolerated in dog trainers?

This post made me think of an obedience class I am in with my newly adopted male pit-mix. As part of adopting him, I had to sign up for classes. Although I have used a trainer who comes to my house, who trained under Jean Donaldson, I wanted to work with him in a group setting, so I chose to take classes at the facility where I do agility with my other dog. I would be working with a different trainer for this class.

When I showed up the first night, a teenage girl and her mother immediately ran up and said, "Oh, you adopted so and so. We wanted him so bad but got this dog instead (a border collie)." The trainer in front of me told the girl, "good choice," which I took to mean good thing you didn't choose the pit. I thought, oh, great, another dog person who doesn't like pit bulls.

I told the trainer I had a Sense-ation harness on order in that my dog had no formal training before I adopted him. She said I should just get a halti or use a martingale; she didn't like harnesses. I have since used my harness and it works great. However, last week about halfway through the class my boy decided to have a teenage temper tantrum (he's a year to a year and a half) and started chewing on the leash and rolling on the floor. I asked the trainer how she would handle that. She came over, took his leash and proceeded to wrestle with him. When she failed to get him under control, she yelled at him and then said, "I hate harnesses! You have no control." It was very upsetting for me and I felt she was embarrassed in front of the class for not being able to get him under control and thus blamed the harness. It also made me feel like she does not like my dog. She finished with telling me to spray some bitter apple on the leash. She offered no other options to solve his behavior.

What I learned from this incident is that I should have followed my instincts and simply removed my dog from the situation to re-start his attention. In this case, I felt like what she was doing was not positive and he fought all the harder against her methods. After she walked on, I took him outside for a walk around the building and when we returned, he was good for the rest of the class.

So, to address Valerie's blog, while I really do not feel like returning to the class, I am not a quitter. This facility is well known in our area and I know the woman is a good trainer. However, she and I don't agree on some of the methods or obviously the equipment to use. I do realize, however, that there are things I can still learn from her. If nothing else, these past 3 classes have been a great tool to add to my repertoire about what works and what doesn't. I wanted to shout, "Go to Dog Star Daily and read up on what they would do in this instance," but of course I didn't. And reading this blog makes me glad I kept my mouth shut. I probably will have a conversation with her about how I think it could have been handled differently. How she reacts to that will most likely determine whether I would consider taking another class from her. Currently I love the agility instructor I work with at her facility who is as kind and positive as can be. This blog made me realize that most trainers have something to offer and if your dog is not truly being harmed, you can pick and choose what works for you and your dog and leave the rest.

I think any tool can be misused horribly.  Even flat collars if used to jerk and tug and yank your dog around by could be aversive, same with the standard 6 foot leash attached to it if used in that way or used (as I saw one "trainer" do) to whack the dog on the nose when it won't sit immediately when you stop.  I could use a tennis ball in an aversive way by hitting my dog with it.  It doesn't necessarily mean the positive trainer is using them incorrectly.  The people I know who use martingale collars do so because their dog can easily slip its collar.  It's never tightened to cause discomfort, just to not be able to slip over the head.  I do agree about head collars, unfortunately.  I see an occasional dog who seems ok with it, but the rest are all fighting it and I find they don't work as well as people want them to as far too many dogs are able to push it off their nose.  I'm definitely not a fan of those!

Having worked with dogs for almost fourty-some years now, I made the observation that there is either too much of a bad thing, or too much of a good thing. There doesn't seem to be a happy medium anymore. I took my shepherd puppy to puppy class and was told, that the word "no" is a "no-no". (This was btw a highly accredited APDT trainer with an immaculate reputation). Sorry- my puppy bites me the calves I will tell her "no". I will squeal, I will wince and she will understand, that no means just that: NO ! I don't have to apply any physical punishment to make my dog understand. I used to train Schutzhund in Germany all the way up to SchH III (beginning) and the things we did to our dogs was anything but pretty.  If I ever meet my shepherd behind the pearly gates, I hope to Dog she will forgive me ! ! ! What on earth was I thinking ? ? ? ? ? It got to the point where my dog ran the other way when she saw me coming with the dumbell. :( Fast forward: I worked with my standard poodle. (Not a shepherd, let me asure you.) He was very sensitive, delicate and SMART. He trained ME to the point of bribery and refused to perform unless rewarded. This was the flip side of the coin. Honestly - here I was, trying to forget the "old ways" and open to learn something new and it got me a totally spoiled dog. Fast forward again: I found the happy "medium". My dogs have NEVER been physically punished and only get rewarded, if they perform in a way that I expect them to perform in. Sloppy sits are ignored, as are slow-motion downs.......etc.etc. Fast ones earn them a reward.  They also know that my growl is louder than theirs and the couch is mine and their's only, when invited. I have two second hand dogs that need heavy rehab-work and one that I had from puppyhood on. HUUUUUUGE difference. The ones that experienced abuse before have learned to completely shut down when afraid and I wouldn't even think of going in the direction of negative influence. (Even though sometimes I feel like wringing their necks ! *lol*) The shepherd I got when she was eight weeks old. What a difference ! She is well socialized, loves people and animals alike (Okay - cats excluded) and I can take her anywhere I go.  She was a firecracker as a puppy and has grown up to walk politely on  without pulling.  She learned it without any harness, no gentle leader, no martingale. Her predecessor the same. He was a 180 pound Great Dane and not the lazy kind. 

My pet peeve is, that people want results and they want them F A S T ! With patience and repetition and positive reinforcement it may take a whee bit longer and the success is not instantanious, but you have a dog that trusts you and still respects you without any fears ! Isn't that worth it ?

I keep hearing people saying they were told not to say "no" to their puppies. I was told the same thing, but I wasn't just don't don't use "no" and it was never with the suggestion that you shouldn't tell a dog not to do something. Instead, I was told why it was a good idea to avoid "no": because people use the word "no" way too much and the word ends up meaningless to the dog. Like the joke about the dog who thought his name was "No." People (esp novices) use "no" for everything and they use it instead of giving the dog information of what TO do (i.e., they miss training opportunities). So, the advice I got was focus on teaching what I wanted the dog to do instead and to use a different negative marker than "no," -- a word that was unique and not something I'd be likely to say all the time. When my (herding) dogs bit my ankles as puppies, I would say "too bad" and start a timeout. Three repetitions and they gave up a bad idea. When they'd try to chew something contraband, I didn't say no, I traded for something appropriate for them to chew on. I think that's the message trainers are trying to convey when they say don't say "no," tho it seems for some reason that message isn't getting across clearly enough.