Southend dog training

[SarahSissions]

Just seen this comment on another post “I was about to say the same. I don't know why people don't agree with their methods. They don't do anything cruel.”

On the home page of their website they have a picture of a dog wearing a prong collar, and often write posts advocating their use. Just because someone has a lot of Instagram followers doesn’t make them reputable, it makes me so angry that people don’t do a bit of digging and research into people they recommend.

My issue with the “some of his videos are good” argument is that less educated people, or people new to dog training don’t have the necessary experience to recognise the good versus the bad.
they look to a trainer, get results so trust that trainer and then watch the next video.
Studies have shown that the average dog owner does not follow manufacture’s guidelines when using these type of adversives and DEFRA funded research finds that these methods aren’t effective (and I don’t think defra has a hidden agenda here)

@sunsetsandsandybeaches well many disagree with you bar the prong collar. Using forceful aids on dogs in my opinion is wrong. On what context do you work with aggressive dogs are you a trainer.

I think you've misread me - I don't use prongs or any other forceful aids?

I said "a truly aggressive dog will always be aggressive and putting a prong or shock collar on it will only add fuel to the fire."

I'm a dog walker and have qualifications in dog behaviour - I've worked with quite a few aggressive dogs over the years, though I no longer work with them now.

I like most of his "basics" videos and has been the biggest public voice of advocating for your dog and not letting it off the lead if it hasn't got a bulletproof recall .

It's about time these messages are widespread and I don't see anyone else saying these things to such a large audience .

Of course novice owners can't identify a bad trainer from another , or they wouldn't be at one in the first place if they could most probably. I don't think he has ever encouraged people to use prong collars - but yes has shown himself and other trainers using them .

Those who want free content and enjoy that aspect of SDT I can reccomend KikoPup and Zak George on YouTube.

Zak uses mild leash corrections from time to time but nothing overly aversive. KikoPup is 100% positive. Zak also shows videos of him training untrained dogs from scratch and outlines the process he uses. I believe he also has a subscription service you can join for more indepth help. He does, like all humans, make mistakes, but he analyses those mistakes and explains how he could have done better which is useful for a novice dog trainer.

absolute-dogs.com/ use games and handfeeding to train unwanted behaviours and also have lots of paid and free content and a Facebook group.

positively.com/dog-training/ Victoria Stillwell also has a lot of free content on her website although I'd be more cautious when using her technqiues. The vast majority of it is great and 100% force free although she does use advocate the use of some aversive methods which are shown in studies to increase the stess hormone cortisol in dogs and cause anxiety and distress.

What I do like about her site is that she backs up her methods with science and discusses the theory and evidence behind her techniques.

some aversive methods have a place when used 100% correctly and in certain, specific circumstances but I would not reccomend a novice to try them based off the back a video they have watched. They need to be applied consistently and the timing of the punishment needs to be perfect otherwise these methods cause nothing but harm and distress and the dog does not learn anything.

With 100% positive training all that will happen if your timing is off or you make a mistake is training will take longer.

For those wanting to learn more about the science the national library of medicine publishes a lot of studies which can be accessed for free.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/?term=canine%20behaviour

And Amazon has some great books available as eBooks. Anything by Jan Donaldson, Turid Rugaass and Gwen Bailey is worth reading. All of them dig down into the scientfic theory behind their methods.

I would like to point out that if your dog has serious behavioural issues or shows reactivity or aggression online training is not for you. You need face to face on the ground help from a registered, qualified behaviourist.

Online content is great for obedience training and minor issues like jumping up or counter surfing but not for aggression or reactivity. You need RL help for that.

Jeez, this has kicked off.

@OneFootInFrontOfAnother
Edith the argument that shock collars dont hurt is just incorrect. Adversive training has to hurt or cause positive punishment to work. That is just science and one that all trainers agree on whether balanced or positive.
A punishment doesn't need to cause pain (which is what i think you're saying). A dog can find something that isn't painful deeply aversive. For an aversive to work, the dog has to not like it. It can not like it a little bit, or a lot. A dog find an e-collar stim a bit of a surprise, a touch uncomfortable, enough of a distraction from what they were doing to refocus on the handler.

Your commment I would agree with you that 'Cruelty,pain and fear have no place in dog training with one exception: a confirmed stock-worrier when other training methods had failed. I don't subscribe to death before discomfort' ....but that is not the only option - just use a lead!
Do you mean, keep your dog on a lead? Or use your lead for training? I trained my dogs to leave sheep alone using a slip lead and mild aversion. The other day they came across an escaped lamb when walking on a fenced footpath with DH. They weren't scared: they went to the lamb, had a look, left it alone, no aggression, no desire to chase.

Thank you for the podcast recommendation - something to listen to with the next batch of ironing.
Thought I could as well put 'positive' in inverted commas as you put 'balanced'. Most 'positive' training involves negative punishment.

@Frequency
The dog and the prong collar/sheep for example. That dog no longer tried to chase sheep because he is terrified of them. Sheep cause pain. Now imagine what is going to happen if a sheep gets too close?
You're making a big assumption there. The dog might have finally learned that chasing sheep is a big no-no, or decided that they're perhaps a bit scary after all, or while the sheep aren't scary of themselves, running towards them can have a uncomfortable consequence . If a sheep gets too close he has the option of evasive action (and most sheep, unless very familiar with dogs, rend to stay away). And would it be better for that dog to have to be on lead all or most of the time in case he encounters a straying sheep or is prepared to jump a fence to enter a field (a big dog can easily clear stock fencing plus a wire)?

I'm not recommending SDT, I don't know enough about them, but
are you able to find actual, scientific studies with data (not anecdata from Faceache) proving that aversive methods are beneficial to some dogs?
If the methods are scientifically sound why has this not been proven?
As I have said upthread, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I know too many happy, confident dogs who have been trained to a very high level using balanced methods to say that it doesn't work and that it makes the dogs unhappy. Dogs that perform at the top of activities where there are many competing reinforcers (gun dog trials, Mondioring) are almost without exception trained in a balanced way. These are dogs that are fulfilling their drives and enjoying rewarding lives with their handlers.

Thanks this is very helpful !

As I have said upthread, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I know too many happy, confident dogs who have been trained to a very high level using balanced methods to say that it doesn't work and that it makes the dogs unhappy. Dogs that perform at the top of activities where there are many competing reinforcers (gun dog trials, Mondioring) are almost without exception trained in a balanced way. These are dogs that are fulfilling their drives and enjoying rewarding lives with their handlers

Actual scientific research disgrees with your anecdata.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7743949/

@Frequency
With 100% positive training all that will happen if your timing is off or you make a mistake is training will take longer.
There have been a couple of threads on MN over the past few years where a dog trained with +R has gone completely off the rails. One in particular that I remember was being an utter pita on the lead, jumping up and snapping at the owners, to the point of tearing clothes and leaving bruises. It's possible that the dog had a brain issue or a hormone problem, but it's at least as likely that the +R was being poorly applied, and it needed some boundaries, some negative punishment (withdrawal of attention) to teach it to settle, and possibly a few corrections. IIRC, the owner had been to a trainer who had used leash corrections, but the owner hadn't liked seeing the dog being 'yanked about' and hadn't gone again.

I could be wrong, but that thread really got me thinking.

Leash corrections shouldn't be "yanked" about. What it should be is redirecting the dog by using the leash to move the dog away from the stimulus. A decent, experienced trainer would never allow a dog to get so close to the stimulus that it loses control and needs a harsh correction.

When positive training goes wrong it is almost always because the training was not applied consistently e.g a dog who is allowed to jump on Gran but not allowed to jump on random bloke at the park is going to have a hard time learning that jumping up is not acceptable, hence the reason my dog still jumps. Sodding Grandma encourages him and then can't understand why he completely loses his shit when we have guests

Vanishingly few trainers are 100% positive in the sense that the dog is never punished. Almost all of them use punishment in the form of withdrawal of fun or affection eg turning your back and ignoring a dog who is jumping up. This is negative punishment and it is 100% a part of positive dog training. However, punishment only works when the dog is shown what the correct behaviour is i.e calmly greeting guests with all four feet on the ground.

Actual scientific research disgrees with your anecdata.
The actual scientific research very often doesn't go back and check on the effectiveness of the training. I've read quite a few of these studies over the years. And to be honest, a lot of learning in the real world involves a level of stress. A small amount of stress builds resilience - it's not the end of the world.

You call this anecdata:
Dogs that perform at the top of activities where there are many competing reinforcers (gun dog trials, Mondioring) are almost without exception trained in a balanced way.
By all means prove me wrong. I know some of these trainers and their dogs. One of them helped me stock-train my dogs.

This is leash correction done correctly. You can see he is using the lead and his body to redirect the dogs attention by moving away from the stimulus. The series Zak did with Moria is particularly useful for a novice trainer. Moira was one of the first adult dogs he trained from scratch and he did make mistakes which he went back over and analysed in future episodes.

www.facebook.com/southenddogtrainingandwalking/videos/5069842213145352

This is also leash correction and it would appear SDT are better trainers than Zak George however if you look closely that dog is wearing a prong collar, hence why the behaviour changed so drastically.

When you watch Zak and Moira you can see Moira is happy. Her tail is in a neutral position, her body is loose and moving fluidly and she is interested in both her surroundings and the trainer.

Watch the dog on SDT video. It's tail is low and wagging slowly, this is an indication of stress, it is panting excessively, there is some lip licking and when walking past the trigger it actually cowered at one point and its eyes are darting looking for an escape route. This is not good training. It is correcting the behaviour, yes, but is causing the dog pain and fear and is doing nothing to address the cause of the reactivity or build a trusting relationship between dog and handler.

If you want to see the long term effects of Zak's training Moira has now been adopted and has her own instagram which shows her to be happy, relaxed and well adjusted.

www.instagram.com/moirarosethegsd/?fbclid=IwAR1UnTyK4CfvtpgM6d3NVSb7aDIEFt8rNPuNKYHc0AP5nQOzzSfFkc0LNCc

Here he is promoting prong collarsSouthend Dog Trainer and why he uses Prong collars - they are ok you know because the ends are rounded off!

Dogs that perform at the top of activities where there are many competing reinforcers (gun dog trials, Mondioring) are almost without exception trained in a balanced way.

Totally disagree with this comment. Dog sport is getting much higher levels in all sports than in the 70s, 80s or even early 2000 and this is down to most of the top competitors reverting to positive training. Even good old gunddog trainers who are in the 1800's! are finding the top dogs are doing better with positive training methods. Mondioring in the UK has a load of positive dog trainers who are sweeping the field with their results.

The police and army are using positive training methods now.

The tide has turned just need to wait for the last few dinosaurs to catch up.

On another note interesting the comments on aggressive dogs always being aggressive. I would argue that if aggressive dogs are not exposed to their triggers then they will not be aggressive. So the impact on the dogs quality of life and whether pts is an option will depend on the dogs triggers, not the level of aggression.

On another note interesting the comments on aggressive dogs always being aggressive. I would argue that if aggressive dogs are not exposed to their triggers then they will not be aggressive. So the impact on the dogs quality of life and whether pts is an option will depend on the dogs triggers, not the level of aggression.

But in the real world, it's not possible to always keep a dog away from its' triggers. Dogs escape, people make mistakes, equipment fails.

No exactly. The trigger is the issue more than the aggression, to the outcome of individual dogs.

But while the trigger may be the issue, the outcome is still the same.

The dog ends up in a stressful situation and bites/attacks. Then, they either get dumped in rescue and PTS, or passed from home to home until the inevitable happens and they end up being PTS, but on their own and away from the family that love them.

I just don't think it's fair to keep a genuinely aggressive dog alive - it's generally always for the sake of the humans involved.

There are far worse fates for an aggressive dog than being PTS at home surrounded by their family. Dogs aren't aware of their own mortality and don't understand that they're going to die. It's so important we don't allow human emotion to get in the way with these things.

Yup, agree with this. The leaders in pretty much every canine profession are endorsing or enforcing positive-based training nowadays.

Also bloody hate the term "aggressive dog" - though understand we all use it as a shortcut. Aggressive is not a type of dog, it's a type of behaviour. (And it's shit at describing even that, as there are so many different behaviours that might come under the term aggression, from biting, to lunging, to barking, to the old side-eye).

An angry person might be angry a lot of the time, some of the time, almost never. They might be angry at major things or minor things.

Aggressive dogs are not always aggressive. That is just a description of their behaviour in certain circumstances. Those circumstances might be varied and include many everyday occurences, making the dog dangerous to live alongside because of the frequency and unavoidability of a trigger. Or they might be very specific: a police dog display aggression in very particular circumstances.

What triggers a dog to aggression will be the ultimate deciding factor in their fate. A dog that barks and lunges at children is likely to be in trouble. A dog that barks and lunges at a wheelie bin, probably not.

Sorry, meant to quote @OneFootInFrontOfAnother's great post as the one I agree with.

@OneFootInFrontOfAnother
Dog sport is getting much higher levels in all sports than in the 70s, 80s or even early 2000 and this is down to most of the top competitors reverting to positive training. Even good old gunddog trainers who are in the 1800's! are finding the top dogs are doing better with positive training methods. Mondioring in the UK has a load of positive dog trainers who are sweeping the field with their results.
Bloody funny how I don't know any winning gundog trainers who are pure positive, then (and I know quite a few, including a KC FT champion). They're all massive on positive reinforcement, building the bond, etc, but they will use aversion too. I'm less well informed on Mondioring and the protection sports in general, but I listen to a fair few podcasts in that field, and the 'dinosaurs' seem to be doing pretty well. Like, winning. Still.

The police and army are using positive training methods now.
Yeah, I listened to a podcast on that too, a German police dog trainer who said that pure positive police dog training doesn't cut it. Training without Conflict podcast, Episode 8.

I follow them on Instagram ive not joined his group as ive used a local trainer for mine. Theres a lot of videos they share from before and after and you can see the difference in the dog. In these videos ive not seen a prong or ecollar its mainly just lead work to build a relationship and to train the owner. I think aversives are needed in training and that doesnt have to mean an ecollar, a simple tug on a lead and a no is classed as an aversive. Positive only trainers use the tools they dont like as a way to attack balanced and say its the only aversives that are used. Balanced is 90% positive reinforcement. I guess its the tool behind the tool, i know i couldnt and wouldnt put an ecollar on mine as i dont know how to use it whereas people buy them and just slap it on and STD and my trainer have said theres specific training for them. also i dont think they're what they used to be you think ecollar and automatically think of the old painful ones. The ones now have been described as similar to a tens machine.

I like some of his advice for owners videos, or break downs of canine behaviour that humans might miss. I've got a giant breed so some of his stuff is quite interesting for me. A lot of his proper training stuff isn't for me or my dog whatsoever though. It would make my dog(and me) anxious as hell.

If you are a good dog owner you don't need to use violence to train your dogs. Had border collies all my life (very strong willed with high herd instinct) and have never had one that needed a lead to walk (although always did at roads because that's sensible), never approached other dogs or people, never killed any livestock because I trained them properly because I wanted to keep them safe for as long as I was lucky enough to have them. As for the person whose dogs killed livestock and highly recommends these methods the first thing the owner should have done was to be a responsible owner and ensure their dog was contained in their property.

Positive only trainers use the tools they dont like as a way to attack balanced and say its the only aversives that are used. Balanced is 90% positive reinforcement. I guess its the tool behind the tool, i know i couldnt and wouldnt put an ecollar on mine as i dont know how to use it whereas people buy them and just slap it on and STD and my trainer have said theres specific training for them. also i dont think they're what they used to be you think ecollar and automatically think of the old painful ones. The ones now have been described as similar to a tens machine.

There are no positive only trainers. Positive training includes the use of punishment mostly via the removal of something pleasent eg affection or a toy. There are force free trainers who do not use any type of physical force but there is not a single trainer that does not use punishment.

And as a PP explained the E collars have to be painful or unpleasent to work. If the dog was indifferent to it because it was "no different to a tens machine" then they wouldn't work.

Studies also show that E collars are less effective than reward based training.

www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2020.00508/full