Dog training methods - I've seen it all - how do we know what's right?

[SuddenlyOld]

At my age I've seen so many training methods come and go, lauded to begin with then trashed as the next method comes in.

First it was Barbara Woodhouse, then Jan Fennell, Cesar Millan, currently Southend Dog Trainers, and even Graeme Hall

All have since been shown to promote 'unhealthy' training methods. Even Graeme Hall looks good on TV but apparently it's all staged and doesn't last.

So my question is, how do we know that current training methods are right for our dogs, or for us?

I do wonder about this because I remember Jan Fennell being on TV and her methods seemed amazing and made sense. I tried them on our barky, jumpy sheltie cross. It didn't work and now her methods have been debunked.

So how do we ever know that current methods are right?

Yep, sadly you're not wrong @Newpeep

Coming from an agility training POV you CANNOT bully your dog into doing well in agility. They have to be both enjoying it but also working with you in a massively heightened arena. I have seen people try - they don't get far. You need the most solid, strong and reciprocal trust and relationship when you go into a ring which is in a highly stimulating environment. I have seen ALL breeds do well in this so it shows that you can use reward based training and be successful.

You can bully a dog into virtually anything but this as confidence and joy = speed and control. I often come back to this when people say you absolutely have to use an aversive to get control of a high drive dog.

Interesting that the OP posed the question and then vanished.

I didn't say it wasn't aversive, I said she would prefer her collar not to vibrate, but I satisfied myself that it was not painful and she was not afraid. I have another dog whose recall is impeccable and we have not had to use the collar, positive reinforcement worked perfectly with her

I do agility with her, she absolutely loves it, we both do. It hadn't even occurred to me that aversives would be employed in agility training, it's about the joy of it and the bond you have with your dog. But we don't compete, we just do classes at the local agility club so perhaps we haven't been exposed to that side of it.

That's the thing. They don't as they won't get far. I've got a lot of experience of teaching and some of the worst bullying I have seen is in 'fun' classes. I have seen none at the higher levels, other than the very odd few at competition which have been dealt with by show organisers IME.

Devil's advocate - you can obviously control your dog in a reward based way in agility which is a real skill. So why do you use aversives in 'real life?' I am curious as to why it is acceptable in some situations and not others?

Yes - management can fail and if an e-collar is managing the situation and the battery dies, you're in the same boat as you would be if the lead broke. If you train the dog NOT to chase the seagull in the first place, you are less likely to need the tool.

My dogs have been trained with a mix of rewards (food, praise and - for one them - a toy) and aversion to leave sheep, deer, rabbits etc well alone. I turned onto a track a few months ago and there were two muntjac browsing maybe 50-80m along. The dogs looked at the muntjac, then they looked at me, all very alert. Good girls, I said, heel. We walked along, the muntjac went into the thicket off to the side, I praised the dogs and released them to have a damn good sniff, then when they thought about following the scent into the bushes I interrupted them and indicated that they should stay on the track. One of them flushed a pheasant the other day, right under her feet. She did a huge joyous bound, thought, Uh, I don't chase those (just as I shouted her name) and came cantering back towards me delighted with herself. I told her what a fabulously good girl she was.

They are purpose-bred, high-drive hunting dogs. They are an absolute joy to walk. I keep tabs on them, and we do all sorts of things on a walk. The younger one in particular keeps a close eye on me.

What I meant was - they were popular at the time and only later were their methods debunked. So how do we know current methods won't be debunked in years to come?

Well, even if it is debunked in 10-20 years, at least positive training isn't harming any animals in the meantime.

That's just it. I use my clicker at the wrong time and all that happens if my dog gets an extra treat. Use an aversive incorrectly and you potentially are scaring that dog for life.

I did know of a very sad case of a dog that was fitted with an air collar to stop reactivity. Dog was shut down into 'behaving'. One day when it's owner was walking the dog a bus let off its air brakes and the dog bit the owner severely and was eventually PTS. This is a real consequence of punishment and fear and it is not an isolated case.

Well, except for all the dogs who are kept on lead because they have no recall, some of whom will cope but some of whom will get frustrated and antsy. (An enclosed field would not cut it for my two.)

And except for the dogs whose owners know they have sketchy recall but let them off and they get hit by a car or kill (or are killed by) a deer.

The BSAVA recommends force free training. And you know what it says about using +R methods to fix predatory chasing? That the outcomes are 'only fair'. I'm not sure if they mean that it works well for some dogs and not at all for others, or is indifferent effectively for all dogs, but either way, it's not great. It's right there in their manual of behavioural medicine.

@EdithStourton well, I don't believe keeping dogs on lead is harmful but I believe we've had this discussion before so I'm not going to bother repeating it.

As for dogs being off-lead, chasing deer and being hit by cars, that's not a positive training problem but a "stupid owner" problem.

They may have been popular, but they were never aligned to any of the scientific research. Smoking is also popular despite all the medical evidence showing it isn't healthy.

Their methods haven't ever been debunked, more like that they weren't 'bunked' in the first place if you see what I mean? Following the popular without verification isn't sensible.

Take the latest Internet fad for raw feeding. There is absolutely no medical research to support that it is any better for the dog. Yet many people believe it as if it were gospel. Just because it is popular doesn't make it right, or supported by any evidence.

I’ve had dogs all my adult life. I currently have two.

For all bar one of the dogs i have owned, positive reinforcement has been enough.

For one dog I currently own, it was not. I went through all my own experience, group training, 1:1 positive behaviourist, books, videos, the lot. We spent a fortune and it just didn’t work. There was nothing he cared about enough positive reward wise to interrupt his dog on dog reactivity. We couldn’t take him anywhere and I wasn’t in control of him as per my legal duty as a dog owner.

So, in desperation we worked with a different trainer and used a prong collar to keep him at heel whilst training. He now no longer needs it. And we used a vibration collar to interrupt his barking at other dogs. He now no longer needs it.

Our (and his) lives and stress levels have been transformed by putting in a few months of work with more aversive methods. They broke the cycle and I now have a much calmer, happier, more attached dog. You can flame me but it’s true, and i’m writing this to give hope to anyone else in the future who feels as desperate and hopeless as i once did.

We have indeed had this discussion before: you told me I shouldn't have dogs.

The thing is, my dogs need to range and run. They are wired to do so. I do not want them to be chase deer or be hit by a car. Since I am not a stupid owner, I have trained them accordingly.

It is painful dont kid yourself it is just uncomfortable.

Dogs pull on leads when it is just uncomfortable they do not stop chasing prey when it is just uncomfortable.They stop chasing when it hurts.

Daniel Mills who wrote the chapter you are refering to for the BSVA is against shock collars and their uses in all cases......

Dogs are very emotionally intelligent animals. They can connect a behaviour to a reaction. If I do x then she gets cross, if I do y, she is happy and I get nice things and attention.

If they love you and are close to you, they want to make you happy.

Just treat them kindly, reward them for good behaviour, show you are happy with them. If they misbehave, tell them off, show you are cross and send them to their bed.

Be firm and start as you mean to go on. If you don't want them on furniture when they are massive hairy beasts, don't allow it when they are a tiny puppy either. Teach them like toddlers.

@Balloonhearts I dont think dogs really care about how I feel or if I am cross. They look at how their behaviour benefits them.

To keep them off the sofa if I give them a comfy bed that has treats in it at random intervals they will choose the bed over the sofa. (nothing to do with pleasing me just nicer for them)

Reinforce the behaviour you want
Prevent the behaviou via mananagment that you dont want

Of course shock collars and prong collars are painful. People are kidding themselves if they think otherwise. Do aversive tools “work”? Well, you might achieve the behaviour you want, but you may damage your dog for life. And even if the dog seems fine, you’ve still intentionally hurt him to force him to do what you want. That isn’t the kind of relationship I want to have with my dogs.

Yes, I know. His refusal to use aversion is why he can't fix reliably fix predatory chasing.

Daniel Mills co-authored two anti-e-collar papers based on a very shoddy piece of research that has been widely criticised.

How was the research shoddy?

The groups of dogs were not properly matched

The e-collar group was trained in Scotland in winter now; the +R group trained by e-collar trainers ditto. The APDT group was trained in Lincoln in the spring. I don't know if you've ever tried training in the snow...

The videos taken of the training were not blinded (and when 3/5 authors have a known pre-existing viewpoint, blinding becomes even more important than it was anyway). This basically rendered any observational results null and void.

If you take away the compromised video evidence, the results show nothing significant between the groups.

Don't take my word for it: there is a strong critique of both these papers by a Force Free trainer (Jo-Rosie Haffenden of the School of Canine Science) here:
https://www.facebook.com/schoolofcaninescience/posts/3160247170734282

Edited to add a sentence at the start.

I have 2 dogs but they are very different in breed and subsequent behaviour patterns. I do agility training with both...

One is very much into toys and treats, which is fantastic! We do all training rewards based. We go to training class and she'll look at me, asking what do you want me to do? I show her ... she's clever and will do most on her own accord again! I really can't ask for more she's perfect for this type of training.

Second dog isn't bothered by toys. Treats, it depends on what his mood is like and what type of treat... he literally checks out what I cut up before training class... and on the short journey there, will decide if it's worth the effort.
This dog has me and my trainer running in circles trying to entice a cretin behaviour... I think he's laughing at these silly humans!
So, sometimes, I do loose my shit with him and say nasty stuff in a low growling voice and walk away... ok I tell him to get lost and find a new owner!
To this dog is really wired in his reaction...he'll do what is asked but under huffing and puffing, head held low.
Next time round, like a week later, he'll be happy to do whatever is required often with a big smile on his face.
Or he won't do something for ages like the seesaw and we try and try to only find one day he goes off on his own and does it during a jumping sequence, he'll just go off course, do it , stop and look at me with a big smirk on his face.

I've never had a dog like him, I would say he's highly emotionally intelligent and tuned into me. He knows when he's crossed a line. At the same time stubborn and not very willing to back down. Difficult to train, whatever method.
PS he's 3 and has perfect recall!

The reality of the situation is, R+ works as far as increasing the likelyhood of a behaviour recurring… It does NOTHING for taking away an unwanted and potentially dangerous self rewarding behaviour.

@EdithStourton and @HowTheStoryEnds I agree with you. I started to type our story with balanced training, but it turned into a novel. So I'll summarise...

I have a high drive working breed. He's my life and I love him so much.

After 2 years, 3 positive only trainers, hours and hours and HOURS dedicated to consistent training, plus thousands of pounds spent, my boy was more reactive than ever. His world was getting smaller and smaller, we couldn't leave our driveway, couldn't get him in the car, couldn't walk him, we couldn't even get him to the bloody vet. His life was shit. So was ours.

Then we found Jamie Penrith, who we never trained with, but who we did learn a lot from. His free material online was great. I liked that he understood the importance of safety, for us, my dog, and livestock and other people/dogs in the environment. From there, we found our current trainers, who have quite simply changed our lives immeasurably.

My boy just needed more guidance to learn what was ok, and what wasn't ok. We did this with an e-collar. I tried it on myself first. And learnt lots about it and how the training worked. I was surprised at the feeling, I thought it would hurt, but it felt like a fly landing on your skin. It was less than a tickle. I use a tens machine for awful period pain, it kind of feels like a tens machine but way less, like I say, like an ant or fly crawling on you. His e-collar level was 3 (out of 127) when I try it on myself I can't feel anything at all until it gets to level 10 (when it feels like an ant crawling) but for my boy, it's effective at level 3.

At no point during our training has my dog been in pain. At no point has he been frightened. Yes, he'd prefer to not feel the sensation of a fly on his neck. But if you could see him now, compared to before, you'd be so happy for him.

After the first session with the collar we saw an improvement. We could leave the drive way and were able to walk him up the road a little bit. We were just as consistent as before, and my dog has reaped the rewards.

He now has freedom, freedom around livestock, he's not at risk of being shot by a farmer. He can get in the car. He can go on beautiful walks. He can walk past other dogs with 0 reaction, he walks WITH other dogs, all offlead. He doesn't try to dive into busy roads, chasing after cars. He's neutral around children and people. He's beautifully behaved in the house. His recall is iron clad. His life, is perfect. He's happy. Our relationship is gorgeous. And that was all achieved, with the tiniest tickle on his neck.

I will argue to the death, after what I've experienced, that it's the best thing we could have done for him. Positive only training is great if it works. If it doesn't work, it's not great.

You can all think or say whatever you wish. I know my dog wouldn't be with us if we'd let it carry on the way he was going.
To me, the following is all that matters... He's loved beyond measure, he's safe, he's never been hurt, I can promise you that. I'd never let anybody hurt him. And he loves us back.

Apologies for typos.

I typed that out a few times, but feel I glossed over the explanation out of extremely reactive he was. We have videos of the worst of it, and I'm truly appalled looking back.

He was dangerous, it was really unsafe. I definitely blocked out the worst of it.

Sorry to keep commenting but I also wanted to add that our first dog was a cockapoo. We positive only trained him with 0 issues. It can totally work! And if it does, be so thankful because it's so much bloody easier!!!

But it doesn't work for all dogs, and that is my point.